Don't really know how you could read that review and come away thinking that. A "better than the iPhone? it depends" conclusion is quite good for any competing product, I'd think.
Re-read the review, especially the parts I bolded.
I read the review when it first came out, and I read it again now. The review is very much, meh. The only thing he's going to use it for is e-mail. That's very clear. If he didn't need RIM's e-mail, it's not likely he would use it at all. He finds a few thing nice, but is not terribly impressed. That's one reason why he's going to have an iYouch as well.
That negates the entire purpose of the Storm, which is supposed to compete with the iPhone on all levels. It can't.
People who need RIM's e-mail, need it. It pretty much ends there.
Should I quote all the bad things he had to say about it?
Did you read all the reviews I posted. I do hope you are in the middle of doing that now. There is one other that is not as bad as the others in there. You can quote from that if you like.
Quote:
And you really don't know that they won't, eh?
I don't have to. It's your statement that's in doubt, not my questioning of it.
Quote:
Let's just say that RIM's past speaks well for them as a company on the whole, just as it does for Apple.
Yes, but they aren't doing so well now. Their stock has also fallen far more than Apple's, and is being shorted even more so.
Quote:
Far as the reviews of the Storm that are negative, I'm well aware of them. I simply was trying to impart to you that not all reviews of it were negative, and they aren't.
...
The one you linked to certainly isn't very positive. He's giving it a c+ at best.
[QUOTE=TBaggins;1352060]You've stated that Verizon is worried, so you're guilty of exactly what you're complaining about.[quote]
Well, I suppose you're right. I didn't mean it that way. What I meant was that they've stated that they needed a competitor to the iPhone, and the Storm is it. The fact that it was pretty late, and still released with plentiful bugs right before the holiday shopping season, is evidence that they felt that they just HAD to get this out, problems or not.
Quote:
Btw, RIM makes the Storm, not Verizon. So technically, RIM is the one who would've rushed it out.
It wasn't required to say that, as I'm pretty sure we all know that. I've stated is several times. But, just like Apple's relationship with AT&T, and everyone else's relationship with the carriers, the carrier is a very important part of that relationship. That's one reason why Apple had to drag developers out of 10.5 to work on the iPhone. Dates must be met when dealing with partners that depend on release dates.
RIM's efforts with the Storm were apparently unsuccessful, so that Verizon was forced to release a faulty product, possibly months before it should have been released, even though it was already delayed for months. We can see the result.
So this phone was almost as much as a Verizon phone as a RIM phone.
Quote:
I'm far from the only one who's noticed that ATT has its weaknesses, Mel. Check out JD Power or Consumer Reports sometime.. ATT loses almost every time to Verizon.
Or better yet, look at churn rates, since cellular customers tend to vote with their feet. ATT's churn rates (i.e. number of ppl leaving them) are consistently higher than Verizon's. Yes, even after the iPhone.
They all have their weaknesses. The differences in churn rates isn't that much really.
While reception for Sprint, for the years I had it were also rated badly, I rarely had problems. I'm not always so sure what these numbers really reflect. When I first got the iPhone in September, the service wasn't so hot for the 3G service, but has improved remarkably as of late.
Quote:
Now, no one's arguing that the iPhone doesn't help ATT in some ways- data ARPU, for example, is a biggie. But that's mitigated to some extent by ATT having to pay through the nose for the privilege.
If you go over your argument, you will see that mostly, you've been arguing that very thing. It's not likely that any cell company doesn't pay though the nose for any hot product. The iPhone is just hotter than most, and so companies pay some more to get the advantages it offers them that other products do not.
If they weren't getting more out of the phone than they were losing, they wouldn't be doing it, so its not a valid argument.
Quote:
I never said the iPhone was of "little worth". I have said that Apple makes ATT pay handsomely for the privilege, and they sure do.
You've said that its costing AT&T, and thus hurting their profits, rather than helped them, when it's not. One time charges mean little when looked at over the life of the contract.
Quote:
I agree that, overall, the iPhone is a benefit. Phone carriers see their future as being in data, and the iPhone is the most compelling portable data device currently. But that doesn't mean that Steve can ask for the kitchen sink and expect to get it every time, from everyone. China Mobile said no to him for a long time. So did Verizon.
I haven't seen you indicate that before. Maybe it was too subtle for me to catch.
Apple, and other companies all strive to drive a hard bargain. Sometimes they get all they want, sometimes, they don't. It doesn't bother me, and it doesn't bother the, as long as they know that what they got was what they needed. That's the difference between business people and people who were never in business. Business people keep their feelings out of relations, thought it may not always seem that to to the public. Of course, there will always be a few who don't. but they are rarely successful.
That's not the point! Everyone who has something that someone else want,s drives a hard bargain. That's the way it works. Jobs is not different than anyone else there. Apple is just more visible, and so it seems as though he's different there. He's not.
Quote:
Let's say VZW-Alltel's potential to add to Apple's iPhone sales shrinks quite dramatically, down to your original 15% guesstimate. Guess what? That's still sales equal or better than what Apple is getting out of the largest European countries. Does Apple not want to be in France? Germany? The UK? 'Cuz VZW-Alltel will have more customers than there are PEOPLE in any one of those nations (they'll need a couple of quarters of growth to exceed Germany's total population, but it'll happen).
Let's be real here... Apple would LOVE to do a deal with VZW-Alltel once the ATT exclusive runs out. The question is how intransigent the two sides want to be.
I'm not arguing that. I'm simply saying, in your statement that Apple needs Verizon more than Verizon needs them, that it's not true. Apple can do very well without Verizon, if they have to give up too much.
Quote:
Either you can afford it, or you can't. You're wanting it is immaterial. *shrug*
I'm not sure what that means. Of course, someone has to be able to pay for it. People do that all the time without being able to afford it. The smart ones give up something else.
Quote:
Let's say they do add that 33% to the current iPhone market. Even then, VZW-Alltel potentially adds 25-30% to Apple's iPhone sales, again, assuming ATT-like adoption rates. Still very, very far from chump change.
...
Those numbers are absurd. It would add, at most 15% now, and half that, once China is here, and less when other countries sign on.
The iPhone without a data plan is pretty pointless. You might as well just buy the Touch.
A required data plan is pretty logical for a data centric phone. Being required to pay for navigation, media downloads, and visual voicemail are not logical. If you buy a Verizon phone with no WiFi then you are forced to get a data plan.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TBaggins
ATT 'charges extra' by making you take the data plan, right? That's $30/month, for two years. So, what are you concerned about? VZW charging something else on top of that? Or charging more than $30/month for the mandatory data plan?
The iPhone without a data plan is pretty pointless. You might as well just buy the Touch.
It's actually more useful without data than you let on.
Just the fact that it's a PDA would make it useful enough to me without data, let me sync my address book and calender with my computer. It's quite useful in letting my get rid of the iPod as well. Other phones do play music, but nothing else does anything like smart playlists that I know of. So I do believe there is plenty of benefit to using iPhone without a data plan. Just saying get a Touch means that the user still needs to carry a separate device to handle the phone part, and that doesn't address being able to sync the contacts.
It's actually more useful without data than you let on.
Just the fact that it's a PDA would make it useful enough to me without data, let me sync my address book and calender with my computer. It's quite useful in letting my get rid of the iPod as well. Other phones do play music, but nothing else does anything like smart playlists that I know of. So I do believe there is plenty of benefit to using iPhone without a data plan. Just saying get a Touch means that the user still needs to carry a separate device to handle the phone part, and that doesn't address being able to sync the contacts.
Then you still need to get a plan with whatever services you need for the phone you did buy. So now you've bought two devices to pay for, and carry around.
Why bother? The truth is that unless you're in some local where service from one carrier is really better than another, the difference is too small to matter.
Then you still need to get a plan with whatever services you need for the phone you did buy. So now you've bought two devices to pay for, and carry around.
Why bother? The truth is that unless you're in some local where service from one carrier is really better than another, the difference is too small to matter.
You're misunderstanding what I said. I don't know where to start, as I don't know how you got to that conclusion.
One thing I do know is that I can get 95%+ of my typical use of the iPhone without needing the benefits of the $30/mo. data plan that I supposedly absolutely must have in order to make good use of the device. An iPhone without a data plan would work just fine for me.
You're misunderstanding what I said. I don't know where to start, as I don't know how you got to that conclusion.
I am?
I took it from where Teno said that an iPhone without a data plan is pointless, and you replied that it wasn't as you could use it as a PDA etc. It also looked as though you were saying that a phone would also be required.
One thing I do know is that I can get 95%+ of my typical use of the iPhone without needing the benefits of the $30/mo. data plan that I supposedly absolutely must have in order to make good use of the device. An iPhone without a data plan would work just fine for me.
Ah, you added to the post. So you're saying that you don't need the data plan and can save the $30 a month.
I take it then that going on the internet either isn't important to you, or that doing it through WiFi, when available is sufficient?
You don't mind carrying two devices around? I find it annoying.
Ah, you added to the post. So you're saying that you don't need the data plan and can save the $30 a month.
I take it then that going on the internet either isn't important to you, or that doing it through WiFi, when available is sufficient?
You don't mind carrying two devices around? I find it annoying.
I get some through WiFi, but I also have computers readily available at work and at home.
I do mind carrying two devices around, I was trying to say that a dataless iPhone would still save me from that. That's why I find the iPhone to be handy. I'm not saying I don't get some benefit from mobile data, the little use I get doesn't seem to be worth what I'm paying.
I get some through WiFi, but I also have computers readily available at work and at home.
I do mind carrying two devices around, I was trying to say that a dataless iPhone would still save me from that. That's why I find the iPhone to be handy. I'm not saying I don't get some benefit from mobile data, the little use I get doesn't seem to be worth what I'm paying.
Ok. I wonder how many more iPhones would be sold if they didn't need to be sold with a data plan? I also wonder if any carriers anywhere sells them without a data plan.
Wow... I go away for a few hours, and Mel's writing some freakin' novels here.
But more importantly, Mel - and please don't take this the wrong way - but whether you realize it or not, you have been somewhat unpleasant in this thread, in a way that I haven't seen from you since the days when I first got here. \
It's not entirely over our disagreements I think... and even if it is, you need to understand that I find some of the things you're saying to be just as illogical and uninformed as you think some of my points are. Yet, I'm not being huffy with you, because I respect you. Hopefully you're getting my point here, without me having to spell it out.
In any case, you've written volumes, and I'm a bit under the gun. But I'll see what I can do about responding, assuming you can handle disagreement with good grace, and not the uncharacteristic rudeness I've been seeing.
If not, just let me know, and I won't bother.
(I mean, geez, even Teno's been pleasant by comparison. )
Wow... I go away for a few hours, and Mel's writing some freakin' novels here.
But more importantly, Mel - and please don't take this the wrong way - but whether you realize it or not, you have been somewhat unpleasant in this thread, in a way that I haven't seen from you since the days when I first got here. \
It's not entirely over our disagreements I think... and even if it is, you need to understand that I find some of the things you're saying to be just as illogical and uninformed as you think some of my points are. Yet, I'm not being huffy with you, because I respect you. Hopefully you're getting my point here, without me having to spell it out.
In any case, you've written volumes, and I'm a bit under the gun. But I'll see what I can do about responding, assuming you can handle disagreement with good grace, and not the uncharacteristic rudeness I've been seeing.
If not, just let me know, and I won't bother.
(I mean, geez, even Teno's been pleasant by comparison. )
...
Sorry if I seem unpleasant, but I've been getting a lot of this about this industry, and I guess I'm just getting tired of it.
By the way, I'm just answering you as you are answering me. When you break my posts down almost line by line, I have to answer them that way. It's why I don't often like to answer like that, but prefer to put an answer at the bottom of the post. It can be made briefer that way.
I suppose this can depend on your lifestyle. But many (if not most) of the apps on the iPhone are rendered useless without a constant data connection.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM
It's actually more useful without data than you let on.
Just the fact that it's a PDA would make it useful enough to me without data, let me sync my address book and calender with my computer. It's quite useful in letting my get rid of the iPod as well. Other phones do play music, but nothing else does anything like smart playlists that I know of. So I do believe there is plenty of benefit to using iPhone without a data plan. Just saying get a Touch means that the user still needs to carry a separate device to handle the phone part, and that doesn't address being able to sync the contacts.
I suppose this can depend on your lifestyle. But many (if not most) of the apps on the iPhone are rendered useless without a constant data connection.
True, but all of those apps are on the Touch too, which you recommended as the alternative, and that device doesn't have a cellular data plan. Seems like cause for cognitive dissonance.
A "road warrior" kind of person can clearly benefit from a cellular data plan. Someone like me, who might spend a lot of time at home, work or other houses or businesses that likely have WiFi, and not really on the road so much, don't benefit nearly as much from cellular data.
True, but all of those apps are on the Touch too, which you recommended as the alternative, and that device doesn't have a cellular data plan. Seems like cause for cognitive dissonance.
I don't think so. As the point of the Touch is to not pay a subscription service.
Quote:
A "road warrior" kind of person can clearly benefit from a cellular data plan. Someone like me, who might spend a lot of time at home, work or other houses or businesses that likely have WiFi, and not really on the road so much, don't benefit nearly as much from cellular data.
That's interesting. Last year I was telling you my iPhone spent a great deal of time connected to WiFi, and you argued that WiFi coverage wasn't good enough to depend on.
But anyway. Not being able to make money from data, the iPhone would not be worth the effort for AT&T. Which is why Verizon won't allow WiFi on its phones.
But anyway. Not being able to make money from data, the iPhone would not be worth the effort for AT&T. Which is why Verizon won't allow WiFi on its phones.
Of course, the fact that AT&T has so many free WiFi spots available to us iPhone users helps as well.
I don't think so. As the point of the Touch is to not pay a subscription service.
But it's still the same apps that on the iPhone demand / require an even higher cost subscription service. All of my PDA needs were handled without any kind of internet connection. I delayed buying a PDA phone a long time because I didn't want to pay for the extra service fees required to get one. So I had a phone and a PDA.
Quote:
That's interesting. Last year I was telling you my iPhone spent a great deal of time connected to WiFi, and you argued that WiFi coverage wasn't good enough to depend on.
Maybe I did, I don't remember what I said last year about that. I was wrong if I said that.
"So is there a downside for Verizon in the survey?
Yes, and it's a big one. AT&T is beating them in the most important measure of all - Market Share.
Among respondents likely to switch providers over the next 6 months, nearly a third (31%) say they're headed to AT&T, while just 19% say they'll choose Verizon.
The main reason for AT&T's advantage is pretty obvious: the Apple iPhone. Ever since the iPhone announcement in January 2007, AT&T has claimed a lead over Verizon in terms of future share.
So while Verizon is clearly the industry leader in customer satisfaction, they're faced with an uphill climb in terms of responding to the iPhone phenomenon."
[i]Yes, and it's a big one. AT&T is beating them in the most important measure of all - Market Share.
Except that the data from their "surveys" have never been reconcile with the ACTUAL numbers.
Based on actual subscriber addition numbers in the SEC filings, Verizon Wireless has basically beaten AT&T Wireless in every quarter since the iphone has launched a year ago.
Comments
Don't really know how you could read that review and come away thinking that. A "better than the iPhone? it depends" conclusion is quite good for any competing product, I'd think.
Re-read the review, especially the parts I bolded.
I read the review when it first came out, and I read it again now. The review is very much, meh. The only thing he's going to use it for is e-mail. That's very clear. If he didn't need RIM's e-mail, it's not likely he would use it at all. He finds a few thing nice, but is not terribly impressed. That's one reason why he's going to have an iYouch as well.
That negates the entire purpose of the Storm, which is supposed to compete with the iPhone on all levels. It can't.
People who need RIM's e-mail, need it. It pretty much ends there.
Should I quote all the bad things he had to say about it?
Did you read all the reviews I posted. I do hope you are in the middle of doing that now. There is one other that is not as bad as the others in there. You can quote from that if you like.
And you really don't know that they won't, eh?
I don't have to. It's your statement that's in doubt, not my questioning of it.
Let's just say that RIM's past speaks well for them as a company on the whole, just as it does for Apple.
Yes, but they aren't doing so well now. Their stock has also fallen far more than Apple's, and is being shorted even more so.
Far as the reviews of the Storm that are negative, I'm well aware of them. I simply was trying to impart to you that not all reviews of it were negative, and they aren't.
...
The one you linked to certainly isn't very positive. He's giving it a c+ at best.
Well, I suppose you're right. I didn't mean it that way. What I meant was that they've stated that they needed a competitor to the iPhone, and the Storm is it. The fact that it was pretty late, and still released with plentiful bugs right before the holiday shopping season, is evidence that they felt that they just HAD to get this out, problems or not.
Btw, RIM makes the Storm, not Verizon. So technically, RIM is the one who would've rushed it out.
It wasn't required to say that, as I'm pretty sure we all know that. I've stated is several times. But, just like Apple's relationship with AT&T, and everyone else's relationship with the carriers, the carrier is a very important part of that relationship. That's one reason why Apple had to drag developers out of 10.5 to work on the iPhone. Dates must be met when dealing with partners that depend on release dates.
RIM's efforts with the Storm were apparently unsuccessful, so that Verizon was forced to release a faulty product, possibly months before it should have been released, even though it was already delayed for months. We can see the result.
So this phone was almost as much as a Verizon phone as a RIM phone.
I'm far from the only one who's noticed that ATT has its weaknesses, Mel. Check out JD Power or Consumer Reports sometime.. ATT loses almost every time to Verizon.
Or better yet, look at churn rates, since cellular customers tend to vote with their feet. ATT's churn rates (i.e. number of ppl leaving them) are consistently higher than Verizon's. Yes, even after the iPhone.
They all have their weaknesses. The differences in churn rates isn't that much really.
While reception for Sprint, for the years I had it were also rated badly, I rarely had problems. I'm not always so sure what these numbers really reflect. When I first got the iPhone in September, the service wasn't so hot for the 3G service, but has improved remarkably as of late.
Now, no one's arguing that the iPhone doesn't help ATT in some ways- data ARPU, for example, is a biggie. But that's mitigated to some extent by ATT having to pay through the nose for the privilege.
If you go over your argument, you will see that mostly, you've been arguing that very thing. It's not likely that any cell company doesn't pay though the nose for any hot product. The iPhone is just hotter than most, and so companies pay some more to get the advantages it offers them that other products do not.
If they weren't getting more out of the phone than they were losing, they wouldn't be doing it, so its not a valid argument.
I never said the iPhone was of "little worth". I have said that Apple makes ATT pay handsomely for the privilege, and they sure do.
You've said that its costing AT&T, and thus hurting their profits, rather than helped them, when it's not. One time charges mean little when looked at over the life of the contract.
I agree that, overall, the iPhone is a benefit. Phone carriers see their future as being in data, and the iPhone is the most compelling portable data device currently. But that doesn't mean that Steve can ask for the kitchen sink and expect to get it every time, from everyone. China Mobile said no to him for a long time. So did Verizon.
I haven't seen you indicate that before. Maybe it was too subtle for me to catch.
Apple, and other companies all strive to drive a hard bargain. Sometimes they get all they want, sometimes, they don't. It doesn't bother me, and it doesn't bother the, as long as they know that what they got was what they needed. That's the difference between business people and people who were never in business. Business people keep their feelings out of relations, thought it may not always seem that to to the public. Of course, there will always be a few who don't. but they are rarely successful.
So... Steve doesn't drive highly aggressive deals? Umm... err... okay. Not.
That's not the point! Everyone who has something that someone else want,s drives a hard bargain. That's the way it works. Jobs is not different than anyone else there. Apple is just more visible, and so it seems as though he's different there. He's not.
Let's say VZW-Alltel's potential to add to Apple's iPhone sales shrinks quite dramatically, down to your original 15% guesstimate. Guess what? That's still sales equal or better than what Apple is getting out of the largest European countries. Does Apple not want to be in France? Germany? The UK? 'Cuz VZW-Alltel will have more customers than there are PEOPLE in any one of those nations (they'll need a couple of quarters of growth to exceed Germany's total population, but it'll happen).
Let's be real here... Apple would LOVE to do a deal with VZW-Alltel once the ATT exclusive runs out. The question is how intransigent the two sides want to be.
I'm not arguing that. I'm simply saying, in your statement that Apple needs Verizon more than Verizon needs them, that it's not true. Apple can do very well without Verizon, if they have to give up too much.
Either you can afford it, or you can't. You're wanting it is immaterial. *shrug*
I'm not sure what that means. Of course, someone has to be able to pay for it. People do that all the time without being able to afford it. The smart ones give up something else.
Let's say they do add that 33% to the current iPhone market. Even then, VZW-Alltel potentially adds 25-30% to Apple's iPhone sales, again, assuming ATT-like adoption rates. Still very, very far from chump change.
...
Those numbers are absurd. It would add, at most 15% now, and half that, once China is here, and less when other countries sign on.
A required data plan is pretty logical for a data centric phone. Being required to pay for navigation, media downloads, and visual voicemail are not logical. If you buy a Verizon phone with no WiFi then you are forced to get a data plan.
ATT 'charges extra' by making you take the data plan, right? That's $30/month, for two years. So, what are you concerned about? VZW charging something else on top of that? Or charging more than $30/month for the mandatory data plan?
...
The iPhone without a data plan is pretty pointless. You might as well just buy the Touch.
It's actually more useful without data than you let on.
Just the fact that it's a PDA would make it useful enough to me without data, let me sync my address book and calender with my computer. It's quite useful in letting my get rid of the iPod as well. Other phones do play music, but nothing else does anything like smart playlists that I know of. So I do believe there is plenty of benefit to using iPhone without a data plan. Just saying get a Touch means that the user still needs to carry a separate device to handle the phone part, and that doesn't address being able to sync the contacts.
It's actually more useful without data than you let on.
Just the fact that it's a PDA would make it useful enough to me without data, let me sync my address book and calender with my computer. It's quite useful in letting my get rid of the iPod as well. Other phones do play music, but nothing else does anything like smart playlists that I know of. So I do believe there is plenty of benefit to using iPhone without a data plan. Just saying get a Touch means that the user still needs to carry a separate device to handle the phone part, and that doesn't address being able to sync the contacts.
Then you still need to get a plan with whatever services you need for the phone you did buy. So now you've bought two devices to pay for, and carry around.
Why bother? The truth is that unless you're in some local where service from one carrier is really better than another, the difference is too small to matter.
Then you still need to get a plan with whatever services you need for the phone you did buy. So now you've bought two devices to pay for, and carry around.
Why bother? The truth is that unless you're in some local where service from one carrier is really better than another, the difference is too small to matter.
You're misunderstanding what I said. I don't know where to start, as I don't know how you got to that conclusion.
One thing I do know is that I can get 95%+ of my typical use of the iPhone without needing the benefits of the $30/mo. data plan that I supposedly absolutely must have in order to make good use of the device. An iPhone without a data plan would work just fine for me.
You're misunderstanding what I said. I don't know where to start, as I don't know how you got to that conclusion.
I am?
I took it from where Teno said that an iPhone without a data plan is pointless, and you replied that it wasn't as you could use it as a PDA etc. It also looked as though you were saying that a phone would also be required.
Where did I go wrong?
One thing I do know is that I can get 95%+ of my typical use of the iPhone without needing the benefits of the $30/mo. data plan that I supposedly absolutely must have in order to make good use of the device. An iPhone without a data plan would work just fine for me.
Ah, you added to the post. So you're saying that you don't need the data plan and can save the $30 a month.
I take it then that going on the internet either isn't important to you, or that doing it through WiFi, when available is sufficient?
You don't mind carrying two devices around? I find it annoying.
Ah, you added to the post. So you're saying that you don't need the data plan and can save the $30 a month.
I take it then that going on the internet either isn't important to you, or that doing it through WiFi, when available is sufficient?
You don't mind carrying two devices around? I find it annoying.
I get some through WiFi, but I also have computers readily available at work and at home.
I do mind carrying two devices around, I was trying to say that a dataless iPhone would still save me from that. That's why I find the iPhone to be handy. I'm not saying I don't get some benefit from mobile data, the little use I get doesn't seem to be worth what I'm paying.
I get some through WiFi, but I also have computers readily available at work and at home.
I do mind carrying two devices around, I was trying to say that a dataless iPhone would still save me from that. That's why I find the iPhone to be handy. I'm not saying I don't get some benefit from mobile data, the little use I get doesn't seem to be worth what I'm paying.
Ok. I wonder how many more iPhones would be sold if they didn't need to be sold with a data plan? I also wonder if any carriers anywhere sells them without a data plan.
But more importantly, Mel - and please don't take this the wrong way - but whether you realize it or not, you have been somewhat unpleasant in this thread, in a way that I haven't seen from you since the days when I first got here.
It's not entirely over our disagreements I think... and even if it is, you need to understand that I find some of the things you're saying to be just as illogical and uninformed as you think some of my points are. Yet, I'm not being huffy with you, because I respect you. Hopefully you're getting my point here, without me having to spell it out.
In any case, you've written volumes, and I'm a bit under the gun. But I'll see what I can do about responding, assuming you can handle disagreement with good grace, and not the uncharacteristic rudeness I've been seeing.
If not, just let me know, and I won't bother.
(I mean, geez, even Teno's been pleasant by comparison.
...
Wow... I go away for a few hours, and Mel's writing some freakin' novels here.
But more importantly, Mel - and please don't take this the wrong way - but whether you realize it or not, you have been somewhat unpleasant in this thread, in a way that I haven't seen from you since the days when I first got here.
It's not entirely over our disagreements I think... and even if it is, you need to understand that I find some of the things you're saying to be just as illogical and uninformed as you think some of my points are. Yet, I'm not being huffy with you, because I respect you. Hopefully you're getting my point here, without me having to spell it out.
In any case, you've written volumes, and I'm a bit under the gun. But I'll see what I can do about responding, assuming you can handle disagreement with good grace, and not the uncharacteristic rudeness I've been seeing.
If not, just let me know, and I won't bother.
(I mean, geez, even Teno's been pleasant by comparison.
...
Sorry if I seem unpleasant, but I've been getting a lot of this about this industry, and I guess I'm just getting tired of it.
By the way, I'm just answering you as you are answering me. When you break my posts down almost line by line, I have to answer them that way. It's why I don't often like to answer like that, but prefer to put an answer at the bottom of the post. It can be made briefer that way.
It's actually more useful without data than you let on.
Just the fact that it's a PDA would make it useful enough to me without data, let me sync my address book and calender with my computer. It's quite useful in letting my get rid of the iPod as well. Other phones do play music, but nothing else does anything like smart playlists that I know of. So I do believe there is plenty of benefit to using iPhone without a data plan. Just saying get a Touch means that the user still needs to carry a separate device to handle the phone part, and that doesn't address being able to sync the contacts.
(I mean, geez, even Teno's been pleasant by comparison.
..
I suppose this can depend on your lifestyle. But many (if not most) of the apps on the iPhone are rendered useless without a constant data connection.
True, but all of those apps are on the Touch too, which you recommended as the alternative, and that device doesn't have a cellular data plan. Seems like cause for cognitive dissonance.
A "road warrior" kind of person can clearly benefit from a cellular data plan. Someone like me, who might spend a lot of time at home, work or other houses or businesses that likely have WiFi, and not really on the road so much, don't benefit nearly as much from cellular data.
True, but all of those apps are on the Touch too, which you recommended as the alternative, and that device doesn't have a cellular data plan. Seems like cause for cognitive dissonance.
I don't think so. As the point of the Touch is to not pay a subscription service.
A "road warrior" kind of person can clearly benefit from a cellular data plan. Someone like me, who might spend a lot of time at home, work or other houses or businesses that likely have WiFi, and not really on the road so much, don't benefit nearly as much from cellular data.
That's interesting. Last year I was telling you my iPhone spent a great deal of time connected to WiFi, and you argued that WiFi coverage wasn't good enough to depend on.
But anyway. Not being able to make money from data, the iPhone would not be worth the effort for AT&T. Which is why Verizon won't allow WiFi on its phones.
But anyway. Not being able to make money from data, the iPhone would not be worth the effort for AT&T. Which is why Verizon won't allow WiFi on its phones.
Of course, the fact that AT&T has so many free WiFi spots available to us iPhone users helps as well.
I don't think so. As the point of the Touch is to not pay a subscription service.
But it's still the same apps that on the iPhone demand / require an even higher cost subscription service. All of my PDA needs were handled without any kind of internet connection. I delayed buying a PDA phone a long time because I didn't want to pay for the extra service fees required to get one. So I had a phone and a PDA.
That's interesting. Last year I was telling you my iPhone spent a great deal of time connected to WiFi, and you argued that WiFi coverage wasn't good enough to depend on.
Maybe I did, I don't remember what I said last year about that. I was wrong if I said that.
Yes, and it's a big one. AT&T is beating them in the most important measure of all - Market Share.
Among respondents likely to switch providers over the next 6 months, nearly a third (31%) say they're headed to AT&T, while just 19% say they'll choose Verizon.
The main reason for AT&T's advantage is pretty obvious: the Apple iPhone. Ever since the iPhone announcement in January 2007, AT&T has claimed a lead over Verizon in terms of future share.
So while Verizon is clearly the industry leader in customer satisfaction, they're faced with an uphill climb in terms of responding to the iPhone phenomenon."
Verizon Wireless Leads in Performance But...
[i]Yes, and it's a big one. AT&T is beating them in the most important measure of all - Market Share.
Except that the data from their "surveys" have never been reconcile with the ACTUAL numbers.
Based on actual subscriber addition numbers in the SEC filings, Verizon Wireless has basically beaten AT&T Wireless in every quarter since the iphone has launched a year ago.