Is that the BEST they can do? That was so incredibly weak. And Luke Wilson? Hell, his uglier, crooked nose brother gets more roles and pu**y than him
Having Luke Wilson there putting up magnets convoluted and trivialized the factual superiority that AT&T?s network architecture has over Verizon?s network. I can?t imagine anyone walking away from that commercial with a clear understanding of the benefits of AT&T over Verizon.
Not that I'm enthused with AT&T. The way I see it, different telecom & datacom choices are like buying manure. You can choose the animal that dropped it, but it's still a bag of sh!t.
If you look at at&t's 3G coverage map in the Verizon ads, you'll notice there is no 3G in the Traverse City, MI area (Northwest of the lower peninsula). There is also only a small amount of 3G in the south central area of Michigan. In fact, there is 3G almost all the way along the I-94 corridor.
I have to wonder if there are other areas of the country that Verizon is not showing accurately. I think they are using an outdated map.
I was with vzw for several years and was just ok with their service but not their customer service and their poor choice of crapy, crippled phones. I jumped on the iphone/att bandwagon when the original came out and havent looked back. I love my phone and love att and their network. I live in the dc suburbs and have NO problems with my att coverage. I have had about 2 dropped calls this year and always have plenty of superfast 3g coverage. In fact i have coverage in places i had NO coverage with vzw. The droid is ok but no iphone, the storm 2 is no iphone, in fact there is no phone better than the iphone and as far as im concerned att works for me where and when i need it. All the attention they are getting will just make them get even better. Hopefully the service will improve in those trouble spots but for now Att & Iphone=Happiness. Couldnt say that when i was with vzw
Try suburban Philly. It blows here. VZW was far better. Lately speeds seem to be better though. Late summer was an absolute nightmare on AT&T. My phone basically didn't work at all for 2 days while they "upgraded" their network.
Sorry, but my favorite part of this was the (unnamed) federal judge stating that most television viewers were "semi catatonic"
Living in a television free home, my family realized that this was the truth that most Americans are too "catatonic" to even consider.
Do yourself an intellectual favor. Pull the cable out of the back of your television and read. Suddenly you will understand the triviality of the "news", and refocus your priorities.
However, it makes you wonder if Steve Jobs did his homework on AT&T's coverage and their capability. I mean, why create a product that people just see and they want it now and have it tarnished because of the carrier you partnered with. I wonder where the iPhone would be today if it were on Verizon? MMS sooner? Tethering by now? Larger US iPhone user base?
Instead, Jobs chose to partner up with AT&T despite the rancor coming from the Apple faithful about hooking up with Cingular/AT&T.
And the Apple faithful, once again, had to bend over and take it and suckle up to the Apple tit for it's nutritional daily dose of Apple goodness!
Unrequited demand. It's a brilliant way of doing things. The creation of buildup, anticipation, to a *possible* move to more carriers.
Exclusivity creates desirability, and in the iPhone's case, creates two years' worth of carriers jockeying for position in order to get their hands on the elusive Holy Grail of smartphones. It keeps consumers who can't have it with the hint, the faintest hope of it coming to other carriers. Keeps them interested. It's the same way with women. Give the man just enough to keep him asking for more - never give too much, too fast. Keep him wanting.
So the iPhone never really becomes "old news." It remains something in demand and special. Its rarity feeds into its mystique. It's as big and new and fresh now as it was on release day.
Further, limiting it to just one carrier for the time being allows Apple to test its powers over the typical carrier - how far it can push, and to what degree Apple is beholden to their policies. It also shows Apple just how desirable the iPhone is. How many people can they get to switch carriers just for the iPhone? It's a great way of guaging the pulse of the market with respect to your product's desirabilty. It also creates the impression that other carriers can "make a name" for themselves with the iPhone. Exclusivity = desirability.
It also demonstrates that Apple doesn't "need" other carriers . . . the carriers need Apple. It's Apple saying "we don't need you - we're already shaking up the industry and setting records with only AT&T. But we might *let* you have the iPhone, because it is a privilege."
Masterful.
One thing to keep in mind: Apple always has a powerful, well-thought out strategy behind everything they do. They are fully aware of the consequences of limiting it to just one carrier. But they are also aware of the benefits.
And the reason behind Verizon's recent ad canpaign?
Reading all the negativity, I feel like I am an exception. I for one am very happy with AT&T's service. Not only do I rarely have a dropped call, the management at the local AT&T store in town bends over backwards to keep me happy (it probably didn't hurt that I was the first in line on June 29, 2007 and coming to them from T-Mobile).
One thing the ad (or anybody else, for that matter) doesn't mention: when I travel overseas I don't have to change phones or even my sim-card. GSM, what AT&T and the iPone use, is a worldwide standard, which cannot be said about Verizon. One very important issue for me!
When the Judge said "semi-catonic", did he actually mean Windows users?
Pathetic cheap shot that has nothing to do with the topic of discussion.
Quote:
As for AT&T's "setbacks", who cares.
Aas long as the iPhone is exclusive to AT&T, Verizon can only dream . . .
Nobody is talking about iPhone exclusivity. Again, bringing up something that has no bearing on the topic of discussion. We're talking about AT&T's network quality and their lack of 3G coverage. Please don't try to derail the discussion with these pathetic side stories.
As for you long Apple lovefest a few posts up, again, you sound more like an investor stroking his Apple stock then someone that actually cares about AT&T building up its network infrastructure to squash the reason why Verizon is attacking them in the first place.
pathetic cheap shot that has nothing to do with the topic of discussion.
it's fun, and it's appleinsider, not winsupersite. Deal with it.
nobody is talking about iphone exclusivity.
except that you were.
again, bringing up something that has no bearing on the topic of discussion. We're talking about at&t's network quality and their lack of 3g coverage. Please don't try to derail the discussion with these pathetic side stories.
this is all about the iphone. Verizon ramped up their ads all of a sudden. They've got iphone fever and are thoroughly frustrated. At&t's response is just a by-product of the carrier wars sparked by the iphone.
as for you long apple lovefest a few posts up, again, you sound more like an investor stroking his apple stock then someone that actually cares about at&t building up its network infrastructure to squash the reason why verizon is attacking them in the first place.
at&t is already building up its network structure. Apparently, at&t's network structure has had less of an impact on the deicison-making of iphone users as we might think. It's interesting to note that people will choose to deal with at&t just to get an iphone. Apple has quite a device.
Here in the Chicago area, coverage is great. My 3G service is better and faster than Verizon's. I realize that there are some users in SF and NY who are experiencing growth pains (wireless data usage is up 5000% over the past 3 years thanks to the iPhone). I don't think that any carrier would have handled that much stress. At least AT&T has a growth plan with their 3G Network (3.2Mb now, then 7Mb then 14MB). Verizon is stuck with their slow CDMA until they migrate to 4G (and this is years away before they can roll this out to a significant footprint).
There is ONE MAJOR difference between Verizon's service and AT&T's: AT&T allows simultaneous Data and Voice. I use this new iPhone App called CISCO WEBEX. This is a great tool for any remote worker. It allows you to dial into a conference call and view a presentation LIVE over the internet. This type of application is a must for any serious business customer AND IS NOT POSSIBLE on the Verizon network.
Here in the Chicago area, coverage is great. My 3G service is better and faster than Verizon's. I realize that there are some users in SF and NY who are experiencing growth pains (wireless data usage is up 5000% over the past 3 years thanks to the iPhone). I don't think that any carrier would have handled that much stress. At least AT&T has a growth plan with their 3G Network (3.2Mb now, then 7Mb then 14MB). Verizon is stuck with their slow CDMA until they migrate to 4G (and this is years away before they can roll this out to a significant footprint).
There is ONE MAJOR difference between Verizon's service and AT&T's: AT&T allows simultaneous Data and Voice. I use this new iPhone App called CISCO WEBEX. This is a great tool for any remote worker. It allows you to dial into a conference call and view a presentation LIVE over the internet. This type of application is a must for any serious business customer AND IS NOT POSSIBLE on the Verizon network.
I understand everything you're saying. I have an iPhone 3GS and for the most part, the service is fine here in the Raleigh, NC area. I can get 3G just about wherever I travel which is great.
However, I'm not so much in a bubble to believe that my experiences mirror all of the other iPhone 3GS owners out there. The map speaks for itself -- AT&T just doesn't have the 3G coverage or capacity to offer quality service to a lot of people.
As for the simultaneous data/talking, I have a question. I tend to talk and use the internet/email with speakerphone every once in a while, but it almost always is when I'm on a WiFi network (like when I'm at home).
So if you're within WiFi range and a call comes in, couldn't a Verizon phone still do talk/data?
So your opinion seems to be that, who gives a **** about call quality or 3G coverage (which severely lags Verizon) since people are still buying iPhones anyway?
I'm sorry if that's not what you're saying, because from all of your posts on the subject matter in this thread and others, this seems to be the case. It's almost as if you don't really care so much about AT&T's problems so long as Apple is doing great financially and with sales.
Again, I'm just trying to understand where you're coming from.
However, it makes you wonder if Steve Jobs did his homework on AT&T's coverage and their capability. I mean, why create a product that people just see and they want it now and have it tarnished because of the carrier you partnered with. I wonder where the iPhone would be today if it were on Verizon? MMS sooner? Tethering by now? Larger US iPhone user base?
Pathetic cheap shot that has nothing to do with the topic of discussion.
Nobody is talking about iPhone exclusivity. Again, bringing up something that has no bearing on the topic of discussion. We're talking about AT&T's network quality and their lack of 3G coverage. Please don't try to derail the discussion with these pathetic side stories.
As for you long Apple lovefest a few posts up, again, you sound more like an investor stroking his Apple stock then someone that actually cares about AT&T building up its network infrastructure to squash the reason why Verizon is attacking them in the first place.
Who died and made you moderator of this discussion?
Did someone forget to lay out the rules so we can all make sure to please the child and only talk about what he wants to talk about.
Comments
Is that the BEST they can do?
Well, they can't say that Verizon's ads are false since that would be lying, so yes, it's the best they can do...
Is that the BEST they can do? That was so incredibly weak. And Luke Wilson? Hell, his uglier, crooked nose brother gets more roles and pu**y than him
Well, it's about getting their message out and unlike Verizon they didn't have enough time. This is just the beginning.
Is that the BEST they can do? That was so incredibly weak. And Luke Wilson? Hell, his uglier, crooked nose brother gets more roles and pu**y than him
Having Luke Wilson there putting up magnets convoluted and trivialized the factual superiority that AT&T?s network architecture has over Verizon?s network. I can?t imagine anyone walking away from that commercial with a clear understanding of the benefits of AT&T over Verizon.
Do people still believe VZW cripples phones (they used to, but my how things change when you start losing customers...)?
Maybe they don't do that any more, but they are up to the same sleaze, even if their tricks are different:
http://pogue.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/...ou-charge-now/
Not that I'm enthused with AT&T. The way I see it, different telecom & datacom choices are like buying manure. You can choose the animal that dropped it, but it's still a bag of sh!t.
I have to wonder if there are other areas of the country that Verizon is not showing accurately. I think they are using an outdated map.
I was with vzw for several years and was just ok with their service but not their customer service and their poor choice of crapy, crippled phones. I jumped on the iphone/att bandwagon when the original came out and havent looked back. I love my phone and love att and their network. I live in the dc suburbs and have NO problems with my att coverage. I have had about 2 dropped calls this year and always have plenty of superfast 3g coverage. In fact i have coverage in places i had NO coverage with vzw. The droid is ok but no iphone, the storm 2 is no iphone, in fact there is no phone better than the iphone and as far as im concerned att works for me where and when i need it. All the attention they are getting will just make them get even better. Hopefully the service will improve in those trouble spots but for now Att & Iphone=Happiness. Couldnt say that when i was with vzw
Try suburban Philly. It blows here. VZW was far better. Lately speeds seem to be better though. Late summer was an absolute nightmare on AT&T. My phone basically didn't work at all for 2 days while they "upgraded" their network.
Living in a television free home, my family realized that this was the truth that most Americans are too "catatonic" to even consider.
Do yourself an intellectual favor. Pull the cable out of the back of your television and read. Suddenly you will understand the triviality of the "news", and refocus your priorities.
As for AT&T's "setbacks", who cares.
Aas long as the iPhone is exclusive to AT&T, Verizon can only dream . . .
However, it makes you wonder if Steve Jobs did his homework on AT&T's coverage and their capability. I mean, why create a product that people just see and they want it now and have it tarnished because of the carrier you partnered with. I wonder where the iPhone would be today if it were on Verizon? MMS sooner? Tethering by now? Larger US iPhone user base?
Instead, Jobs chose to partner up with AT&T despite the rancor coming from the Apple faithful about hooking up with Cingular/AT&T.
And the Apple faithful, once again, had to bend over and take it and suckle up to the Apple tit for it's nutritional daily dose of Apple goodness!
Unrequited demand. It's a brilliant way of doing things. The creation of buildup, anticipation, to a *possible* move to more carriers.
Exclusivity creates desirability, and in the iPhone's case, creates two years' worth of carriers jockeying for position in order to get their hands on the elusive Holy Grail of smartphones. It keeps consumers who can't have it with the hint, the faintest hope of it coming to other carriers. Keeps them interested. It's the same way with women. Give the man just enough to keep him asking for more - never give too much, too fast. Keep him wanting.
So the iPhone never really becomes "old news." It remains something in demand and special. Its rarity feeds into its mystique. It's as big and new and fresh now as it was on release day.
Further, limiting it to just one carrier for the time being allows Apple to test its powers over the typical carrier - how far it can push, and to what degree Apple is beholden to their policies. It also shows Apple just how desirable the iPhone is. How many people can they get to switch carriers just for the iPhone? It's a great way of guaging the pulse of the market with respect to your product's desirabilty. It also creates the impression that other carriers can "make a name" for themselves with the iPhone. Exclusivity = desirability.
It also demonstrates that Apple doesn't "need" other carriers . . . the carriers need Apple. It's Apple saying "we don't need you - we're already shaking up the industry and setting records with only AT&T. But we might *let* you have the iPhone, because it is a privilege."
Masterful.
One thing to keep in mind: Apple always has a powerful, well-thought out strategy behind everything they do. They are fully aware of the consequences of limiting it to just one carrier. But they are also aware of the benefits.
And the reason behind Verizon's recent ad canpaign?
iPhone.
This is a debate only a parasitologist could love.
One thing the ad (or anybody else, for that matter) doesn't mention: when I travel overseas I don't have to change phones or even my sim-card. GSM, what AT&T and the iPone use, is a worldwide standard, which cannot be said about Verizon. One very important issue for me!
When the Judge said "semi-catonic", did he actually mean Windows users?
Pathetic cheap shot that has nothing to do with the topic of discussion.
As for AT&T's "setbacks", who cares.
Aas long as the iPhone is exclusive to AT&T, Verizon can only dream . . .
Nobody is talking about iPhone exclusivity. Again, bringing up something that has no bearing on the topic of discussion. We're talking about AT&T's network quality and their lack of 3G coverage. Please don't try to derail the discussion with these pathetic side stories.
As for you long Apple lovefest a few posts up, again, you sound more like an investor stroking his Apple stock then someone that actually cares about AT&T building up its network infrastructure to squash the reason why Verizon is attacking them in the first place.
pathetic cheap shot that has nothing to do with the topic of discussion.
it's fun, and it's appleinsider, not winsupersite. Deal with it.
nobody is talking about iphone exclusivity.
except that you were.
again, bringing up something that has no bearing on the topic of discussion. We're talking about at&t's network quality and their lack of 3g coverage. Please don't try to derail the discussion with these pathetic side stories.
this is all about the iphone. Verizon ramped up their ads all of a sudden. They've got iphone fever and are thoroughly frustrated. At&t's response is just a by-product of the carrier wars sparked by the iphone.
as for you long apple lovefest a few posts up, again, you sound more like an investor stroking his apple stock then someone that actually cares about at&t building up its network infrastructure to squash the reason why verizon is attacking them in the first place.
at&t is already building up its network structure. Apparently, at&t's network structure has had less of an impact on the deicison-making of iphone users as we might think. It's interesting to note that people will choose to deal with at&t just to get an iphone. Apple has quite a device.
Hell, i might even have apple stock, too!
There is ONE MAJOR difference between Verizon's service and AT&T's: AT&T allows simultaneous Data and Voice. I use this new iPhone App called CISCO WEBEX. This is a great tool for any remote worker. It allows you to dial into a conference call and view a presentation LIVE over the internet. This type of application is a must for any serious business customer AND IS NOT POSSIBLE on the Verizon network.
"Which is sleazier, AT&T or Verizon?"
This is a debate only a parasitologist could love.
What about Sprint? Is Sprint too small to matter?
I hate both companies for being so greedy.
Which company price gouges their customers more:
http://pogue.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/...ou-charge-now/
Here in the Chicago area, coverage is great. My 3G service is better and faster than Verizon's. I realize that there are some users in SF and NY who are experiencing growth pains (wireless data usage is up 5000% over the past 3 years thanks to the iPhone). I don't think that any carrier would have handled that much stress. At least AT&T has a growth plan with their 3G Network (3.2Mb now, then 7Mb then 14MB). Verizon is stuck with their slow CDMA until they migrate to 4G (and this is years away before they can roll this out to a significant footprint).
There is ONE MAJOR difference between Verizon's service and AT&T's: AT&T allows simultaneous Data and Voice. I use this new iPhone App called CISCO WEBEX. This is a great tool for any remote worker. It allows you to dial into a conference call and view a presentation LIVE over the internet. This type of application is a must for any serious business customer AND IS NOT POSSIBLE on the Verizon network.
I understand everything you're saying. I have an iPhone 3GS and for the most part, the service is fine here in the Raleigh, NC area. I can get 3G just about wherever I travel which is great.
However, I'm not so much in a bubble to believe that my experiences mirror all of the other iPhone 3GS owners out there. The map speaks for itself -- AT&T just doesn't have the 3G coverage or capacity to offer quality service to a lot of people.
As for the simultaneous data/talking, I have a question. I tend to talk and use the internet/email with speakerphone every once in a while, but it almost always is when I'm on a WiFi network (like when I'm at home).
So if you're within WiFi range and a call comes in, couldn't a Verizon phone still do talk/data?
.. ... ..
So your opinion seems to be that, who gives a **** about call quality or 3G coverage (which severely lags Verizon) since people are still buying iPhones anyway?
I'm sorry if that's not what you're saying, because from all of your posts on the subject matter in this thread and others, this seems to be the case. It's almost as if you don't really care so much about AT&T's problems so long as Apple is doing great financially and with sales.
Again, I'm just trying to understand where you're coming from.
However, it makes you wonder if Steve Jobs did his homework on AT&T's coverage and their capability. I mean, why create a product that people just see and they want it now and have it tarnished because of the carrier you partnered with. I wonder where the iPhone would be today if it were on Verizon? MMS sooner? Tethering by now? Larger US iPhone user base?
Why do you think the first iphone wasn't 3G?
Pathetic cheap shot that has nothing to do with the topic of discussion.
Nobody is talking about iPhone exclusivity. Again, bringing up something that has no bearing on the topic of discussion. We're talking about AT&T's network quality and their lack of 3G coverage. Please don't try to derail the discussion with these pathetic side stories.
As for you long Apple lovefest a few posts up, again, you sound more like an investor stroking his Apple stock then someone that actually cares about AT&T building up its network infrastructure to squash the reason why Verizon is attacking them in the first place.
Who died and made you moderator of this discussion?
Did someone forget to lay out the rules so we can all make sure to please the child and only talk about what he wants to talk about.
Who died and made you moderator of this discussion?
Did someone forget to lay out the rules so we can all make sure to please the child and only talk about what he wants to talk about.
Are you finished?