Add to it the fact that CDMA phones cannot receive calls when there is data flowing to the phone either, so if you are enjoying the scenery of the GPS app downloading all that wonderful content, enjoy getting voicemail messages.
you're incredibly wrong. what happens if you are on the internet is it cuts the data connection off and allows the call to go through. its how its always been and always will be til LTE.
please never post again and save us the trouble of correcting you.
Is it really that big of a deal? I mean, AT&T's covers 230 million, Verizons covers, what, 280-290 million? Woo, so about 25% more people even tho they dropped the dough to cover 5 times as much physical area. Honestly, if you were a business you'd much rather do business the AT&T way than the Verizon way. Aside from that how many people in the 50-60 million delta have smart phones or some other phone that uses 3G? What % of thsoe 60 million have smart phones? I'm sure it's noticeably less than the people in the metropolitan areas that AT&T covers (also, saying AT&T only cover metropolitan areas is a joke - my hometown has a population of less than 5k and it has 3G coverage).
Basically, would you be willing to put up with a slower network to know that you'll have access to said slower network the 2 times a year when you go visiting the in-laws out in BFE or do you want to have the faster network the other 363 days of the year? Certainly the people in the delta would much rather have Verizon but unless you're in those 60 million the point of their commercial is useless.
It's almost simple math. 1.5x or even 1.25x base (we'll call Verizons 3G speed as "base") for, say, 350 days a year and then .4x base (EDGE) for the other 15 days you end up with a total capability of 443.15 vs 365 w/ Verizon. You'd either 1) have to spend much more time in EDGE land (107 days to be exact) or 2) get even less than 1.25x Verizon 3G speed.
I just don't get it - sure there are complaints from people in NY and San Fran but the numbers speak for themselves. People are always much, much more likely to complain about something than they are to commend it so I'm really not surprised that AT&T gets complained about - they have the #1 customer satisfaction brand on their network. Apple fans are used to stuff just working, you'll see the same thing when/if Verizon gets the phone - it's going to crush their network just like it did AT&T's but here's the difference - AT&T has given Verizon a 4 year buffer to get ready for the iPhone. If you think Verizon's network could haved supported the millions of iPhones currently out there you're kidding yourself.
or Verizon would have the same issues AT&T has - iPhone users actually use the network, so rather than investing in 3G in more areas, they have to invest those resources into the large population areas. Do you really think if everyone switched tomorrow, the Verizon network could handle the additional network bandwidth iPhone owners use?
To see what the service for iPhone on verizon might look like, take a look at their current Droid service:
The "unlimited" verizon data plan for droid actually has a limit on bandwidth use.
The Verizon data plan for droid expressly prohibits tethering. They plan an add on tethering plan, it's not available now, and when it is, it will cost an additional $30/month (and will also have a limit on bandwidth use).
Droid can do visual voice mail, but it costs another $2.99/month
Droid can support exchange servers, but enabling it costs another $15/month
Nice post... Being one that does not have an iPhone and is not with Verizon, I'm glad to read your post where, after some forethought, you quantified the differences of Verizon and AT&T. Instead of the the usual, "stop your whining AT&T" that gets me so hot under the collar because no one forced Apple to sign the deal with AT&T, so apparently Apple was happy with what they were getting. It begs to question, who around here is really doing the whining?! AT&T or somebody else? Congratulations!
AT&T could run an equally "sneaky" ad and run a commercial that zooms out from the US to a world map. Compare Verizon's CDMA range to AT&T's GSM range. Show some poor Droid user trying to visit his family for the holidays in another country listening to static on his phone. However, it was stupid and discrediting for the AT&T marketing department to get all legal-court-action about this.
you're incredibly wrong. what happens if you are on the internet is it cuts the data connection off and allows the call to go through. its how its always been and always will be til LTE.
please never post again and save us the trouble of correcting you.
Well no access to Internet/data while on a call is still a notable failure for a modern network. Kudos to AT&T for at least attempting to step up. It's easy for Verizon to criticize while they sit back with a nationwide 3G network that has nowhere near the same data traffic as the AT&T network. Verizon sits there with a flock of phones that barely have a web browser to run (more like crawl) on their oh-so-mighty network. Verizon would instantly crash if they dared try to accommodate the iPhone.
Droid can support exchange servers, but enabling it costs another $15/month
This is only true for corporate accounts. The standard 29.99 data pack you are required to purchase at the minimum, it includes exchange support. There is no additional cost for this feature for individual and family plans.
2) people are willing to put up with (or ignore) a lot if you carry that golden nugget device."
The iPhone hasn't changed anything when it comes to carriers in the US. ATT was the #2 carrier before the iPhone and it will remain that way with or without the iPhone.
The fact that ATT isn't the #1 carrier shows that a device has very little impact. ATT is far bigger overall then Verizon, they offer bundled deals on digital tv, phone, internet and mobile yet even with all the deals they offer they still can't overtake Verizon because Verizon simple has a much better network and customer service.
Maybe the device make the carrier in Canada but not here we actually need a network that allows us to get work done.
The iPhone has changed the entire carrier game. Everyone has had to expand and improve at that much faster a pace. If there were no iPhone, we wouldn't be seeing this battle between AT&T and Verizon. We wouldn't have seen the FCC step in with new guidelines and recommendations.
It is ALL about the iPhone - what it represents, the benefits, the challenges.
I'd love to be able to get a smartphone without having to pay the data plan. I live on a college campus where I have wifi everywhere 24/7, I have zero interest in paying for a data plan I don't intend to use. I can live without internet EVERYWHERE.
As an iPod Touch user, I'm with you. I'd love to have the functionality of an iPod Touch with the ability to do regular voice calls, without the ridiculously expensive data plan. It looks like the way to do this is:
1) Buy a GSM phone yourself from a non-carrier vendor
2) Take the phone to a carrier and ask for a voice-only plan and SIM card for your device
I hear people are doing this in the US, for example, with used or independently-purchased iPhones. They get the phone unlocked then take it to T-mobile for their SIM card. I don't know for sure that T-mobile will sell you a non-data plan for a smartphone, even if you didn't buy the phone from them. People are primarily doing it to get away from AT&T. From what I've read, its not that T-mobile has a better network, its that they're cheaper. So, if you must have a poor network, at least you pay less for it.
The missing piece is controlling the cellular radio on the smartphone, itself. For example, some "voice-only" plans are actually "voice + pay-per-use data" plans with multiple $/MB rates for that data. I guess it would be up to the smartphone OS to provide you a way to ensure you're sending all data over WiFi and controlling when/if you use a cellular data connection.
Does anybody have experience getting this to work reasonably?
This is only true for corporate accounts. The standard 29.99 data pack you are required to purchase at the minimum, it includes exchange support. There is no additional cost for this feature for individual and family plans.
If that's true, someone needs to explain it to Verizon support. My wife has a Droid (she has to stay with verizon because her relatives all have verizon) and we can't get the Droid email to work with our company email server - which is an IMAP sever running on leopard, not Exchange. When we called support about it, they tried to sell us the $15 upgrade so we could access exchange servers until I explained to them it wasn't an exchange server, just standard IMAP. We still can't get it to work.
In a new ad comparing the 3G networks of AT&T and Verizon, AT&T claims that it offers a better "3G experience" when compared to Verizon. The ad, which features actor Luke Wilson, points viewers to a website, TruthAbout3G.com that contains the tag-line "When you compare, there's no comparison. AT&T. A better 3G experience."
Both the ad and website tout the speed and features of AT&T's network, with the website claiming that AT&T's 3G network covers 230 million people across the nation. The TV ad makes no mention of 3G coverage area or signal quality.
Truthabout3G.com? Sigh. Again, AT&T just does not get it. Verizon is not bashing AT&T for their speed and features, but rather their lack of 3G AVAILABILITY. AT&T must truly be a bunch of morons. The experience one gets from speedy and feature-rich 3G means NOTHING if your 3G network is spotty, or if you can't get 3G at all. Which has been Verizon's point.
Just be thankful you have the iPhone on your network, AT&T, because otherwise no one would be with you.
If that's true, someone needs to explain it to Verizon support. My wife has a Droid (she has to stay with verizon because her relatives all have verizon) and we can't get the Droid email to work with our company email server - which is an IMAP sever running on leopard, not Exchange. When we called support about it, they tried to sell us the $15 upgrade so we could access exchange servers until I explained to them it wasn't an exchange server, just standard IMAP. We still can't get it to work.
Sounds like you got bad service, or the rep misunderstood you when you said "corporate e-mail." But I can attest to exchange not being extra for individual accounts. My firm uses exchange, and all of my email, contacts, and calendar synced out of the box and my monthly statement has only two charges: 59.99 and 29.99. One for voice and the other for data.
No simultaneous data and voice on VZW is a missing feature I was unaware of. Without this competition between VZW and AT&T, I may never have known. The wireless business is so locked down with proprietary information, even about what standards are in use, that any little bit of info is good to see.
The # of People Covered spec where AT&T claims to beat VZW needs some explanation. People move. Is their comparison of population density and coverage maps based solely on where people live, where they work, where they go? Given that the whole point of a mobile device is that you want it with you and working on the go, not just in your house or office, I think their numbers need some explanation.
Truthabout3G.com? Sigh. Again, AT&T just does not get it. Verizon is not bashing AT&T for their speed and features, but rather their lack of 3G AVAILABILITY. AT&T must truly be a bunch of morons.
They get it but it?s not like you can just put up towers whenever you feel like it. GSM-based nwtworks are very different from CDMA-based networks. AT&T is simply advertising the areas in which they do excel while Verizon is advertising the areas in which they excel. It?s marketing 101.
AT&T reportedly covers 75% of the US population with 3G. While this should be improved it?s more important to get towers in densely populated areas onto the better spectrum with more bandwidth to support more users.
Trying to do direct one-to-one network comparison is impossible due to the very different architectures and the ways in which each company formed to it?s current size due to acquisitions. At the end of the end it?s all about what company serves your needs the best. Since I spend my populated areas and like voice and data, AT&T is the carrier for me and they have exceeding my expectations of a carrier in the US.
That said, there current ad is weak. Using Luke WIlson convoluted and trivialized the technical benefits of AT&T over Verizon. And while they should advertise that they have the most sought after smartphone in the country on their network they should not be advertising that they have over 100k apps. That is not their app store. Verizon?s ad hit on a single fact and they hit it out of the ball park. AT&T really needs to get Apple?s PR people to work for them.
The iPhone has changed the entire carrier game. Everyone has had to expand and improve at that much faster a pace. If there were no iPhone, we wouldn't be seeing this battle between AT&T and Verizon. We wouldn't have seen the FCC step in with new guidelines and recommendations.
It is ALL about the iPhone - what it represents, the benefits, the challenges.
There would have still been battles between ATT and Verizon. Its called competition and believe it or not it would have still exsisted even without the iPhone.
There would have still been battles between ATT and Verizon. Its called competition and believe it or not it would have still exsisted even without the iPhone.
It looks like a simulation of competition, because we don't see and price drops of voice/data plans
It looks like a simulation of competition, because we don't see and price drops of voice/data plans
When the AT&T pricing for the iPhone first arrived the unlimited data was an unprecedented $20 while $40-50 were still the most common rates. On top of that the iPhone actually had the ability to actually utilize this data. Part of this ability to offer such a low rate is the requirement that all iPhones pay for it. This has sense been picked up by other carriers which allows them to subsidize these expensive phones further while netting more profit.
After that first year the unlimited data jumped to $30 with the drop of profit sharing and no longer included any SMS but it was still lower than the industry average before the iPhone hit the market. That could be coincidence or that could be the cause and effect. I can't say.
Apparently, AT&T understands how to be cool just about as well as Microsoft. That ad is lame. It doesn't help that they prove Verizon right by talking about their "3G experience" rather than what people care about: 3G coverage.
People want their phones to work. Dropped calls and spotty coverage are things that don't work.
When the AT&T pricing for the iPhone first arrived the unlimited data was an unprecedented $20 while $40-50 were still the most common rates. On top of that the iPhone actually had the ability to actually utilize this data. Part of this ability to offer such a low rate is the requirement that all iPhones pay for it. This has sense been picked up by other carriers which allows them to subsidize these expensive phones further while netting more profit.
After that first year the unlimited data jumped to $30 with the drop of profit sharing and no longer included any SMS but it was still lower than the industry average before the iPhone hit the market. That could be coincidence or that could be the cause and effect. I can't say.
wrong. vzw had a blackberry plan for $30 when the iphone came out. the other PDAs were a different story. i worked for vzw and they very much had it.
Comments
Add to it the fact that CDMA phones cannot receive calls when there is data flowing to the phone either, so if you are enjoying the scenery of the GPS app downloading all that wonderful content, enjoy getting voicemail messages.
you're incredibly wrong. what happens if you are on the internet is it cuts the data connection off and allows the call to go through. its how its always been and always will be til LTE.
please never post again and save us the trouble of correcting you.
Basically, would you be willing to put up with a slower network to know that you'll have access to said slower network the 2 times a year when you go visiting the in-laws out in BFE or do you want to have the faster network the other 363 days of the year? Certainly the people in the delta would much rather have Verizon but unless you're in those 60 million the point of their commercial is useless.
It's almost simple math. 1.5x or even 1.25x base (we'll call Verizons 3G speed as "base") for, say, 350 days a year and then .4x base (EDGE) for the other 15 days you end up with a total capability of 443.15 vs 365 w/ Verizon. You'd either 1) have to spend much more time in EDGE land (107 days to be exact) or 2) get even less than 1.25x Verizon 3G speed.
I just don't get it - sure there are complaints from people in NY and San Fran but the numbers speak for themselves. People are always much, much more likely to complain about something than they are to commend it so I'm really not surprised that AT&T gets complained about - they have the #1 customer satisfaction brand on their network. Apple fans are used to stuff just working, you'll see the same thing when/if Verizon gets the phone - it's going to crush their network just like it did AT&T's but here's the difference - AT&T has given Verizon a 4 year buffer to get ready for the iPhone. If you think Verizon's network could haved supported the millions of iPhones currently out there you're kidding yourself.
Why do you think the first iphone wasn't 3G?
or CDMA?...
or Verizon would have the same issues AT&T has - iPhone users actually use the network, so rather than investing in 3G in more areas, they have to invest those resources into the large population areas. Do you really think if everyone switched tomorrow, the Verizon network could handle the additional network bandwidth iPhone owners use?
To see what the service for iPhone on verizon might look like, take a look at their current Droid service:
The "unlimited" verizon data plan for droid actually has a limit on bandwidth use.
The Verizon data plan for droid expressly prohibits tethering. They plan an add on tethering plan, it's not available now, and when it is, it will cost an additional $30/month (and will also have a limit on bandwidth use).
Droid can do visual voice mail, but it costs another $2.99/month
Droid can support exchange servers, but enabling it costs another $15/month
Nice post... Being one that does not have an iPhone and is not with Verizon, I'm glad to read your post where, after some forethought, you quantified the differences of Verizon and AT&T. Instead of the the usual, "stop your whining AT&T" that gets me so hot under the collar because no one forced Apple to sign the deal with AT&T, so apparently Apple was happy with what they were getting. It begs to question, who around here is really doing the whining?! AT&T or somebody else? Congratulations!
you're incredibly wrong. what happens if you are on the internet is it cuts the data connection off and allows the call to go through. its how its always been and always will be til LTE.
please never post again and save us the trouble of correcting you.
Well no access to Internet/data while on a call is still a notable failure for a modern network. Kudos to AT&T for at least attempting to step up. It's easy for Verizon to criticize while they sit back with a nationwide 3G network that has nowhere near the same data traffic as the AT&T network. Verizon sits there with a flock of phones that barely have a web browser to run (more like crawl) on their oh-so-mighty network. Verizon would instantly crash if they dared try to accommodate the iPhone.
Droid can support exchange servers, but enabling it costs another $15/month
This is only true for corporate accounts. The standard 29.99 data pack you are required to purchase at the minimum, it includes exchange support. There is no additional cost for this feature for individual and family plans.
"1) the device makes the carrier.
2) people are willing to put up with (or ignore) a lot if you carry that golden nugget device."
The iPhone hasn't changed anything when it comes to carriers in the US. ATT was the #2 carrier before the iPhone and it will remain that way with or without the iPhone.
The fact that ATT isn't the #1 carrier shows that a device has very little impact. ATT is far bigger overall then Verizon, they offer bundled deals on digital tv, phone, internet and mobile yet even with all the deals they offer they still can't overtake Verizon because Verizon simple has a much better network and customer service.
Maybe the device make the carrier in Canada but not here we actually need a network that allows us to get work done.
The iPhone has changed the entire carrier game. Everyone has had to expand and improve at that much faster a pace. If there were no iPhone, we wouldn't be seeing this battle between AT&T and Verizon. We wouldn't have seen the FCC step in with new guidelines and recommendations.
It is ALL about the iPhone - what it represents, the benefits, the challenges.
I'd love to be able to get a smartphone without having to pay the data plan. I live on a college campus where I have wifi everywhere 24/7, I have zero interest in paying for a data plan I don't intend to use. I can live without internet EVERYWHERE.
As an iPod Touch user, I'm with you. I'd love to have the functionality of an iPod Touch with the ability to do regular voice calls, without the ridiculously expensive data plan. It looks like the way to do this is:
1) Buy a GSM phone yourself from a non-carrier vendor
2) Take the phone to a carrier and ask for a voice-only plan and SIM card for your device
I hear people are doing this in the US, for example, with used or independently-purchased iPhones. They get the phone unlocked then take it to T-mobile for their SIM card. I don't know for sure that T-mobile will sell you a non-data plan for a smartphone, even if you didn't buy the phone from them. People are primarily doing it to get away from AT&T. From what I've read, its not that T-mobile has a better network, its that they're cheaper. So, if you must have a poor network, at least you pay less for it.
The missing piece is controlling the cellular radio on the smartphone, itself. For example, some "voice-only" plans are actually "voice + pay-per-use data" plans with multiple $/MB rates for that data. I guess it would be up to the smartphone OS to provide you a way to ensure you're sending all data over WiFi and controlling when/if you use a cellular data connection.
Does anybody have experience getting this to work reasonably?
This is only true for corporate accounts. The standard 29.99 data pack you are required to purchase at the minimum, it includes exchange support. There is no additional cost for this feature for individual and family plans.
If that's true, someone needs to explain it to Verizon support. My wife has a Droid (she has to stay with verizon because her relatives all have verizon) and we can't get the Droid email to work with our company email server - which is an IMAP sever running on leopard, not Exchange. When we called support about it, they tried to sell us the $15 upgrade so we could access exchange servers until I explained to them it wasn't an exchange server, just standard IMAP. We still can't get it to work.
In a new ad comparing the 3G networks of AT&T and Verizon, AT&T claims that it offers a better "3G experience" when compared to Verizon. The ad, which features actor Luke Wilson, points viewers to a website, TruthAbout3G.com that contains the tag-line "When you compare, there's no comparison. AT&T. A better 3G experience."
Both the ad and website tout the speed and features of AT&T's network, with the website claiming that AT&T's 3G network covers 230 million people across the nation. The TV ad makes no mention of 3G coverage area or signal quality.
Truthabout3G.com? Sigh. Again, AT&T just does not get it. Verizon is not bashing AT&T for their speed and features, but rather their lack of 3G AVAILABILITY. AT&T must truly be a bunch of morons. The experience one gets from speedy and feature-rich 3G means NOTHING if your 3G network is spotty, or if you can't get 3G at all. Which has been Verizon's point.
Just be thankful you have the iPhone on your network, AT&T, because otherwise no one would be with you.
If that's true, someone needs to explain it to Verizon support. My wife has a Droid (she has to stay with verizon because her relatives all have verizon) and we can't get the Droid email to work with our company email server - which is an IMAP sever running on leopard, not Exchange. When we called support about it, they tried to sell us the $15 upgrade so we could access exchange servers until I explained to them it wasn't an exchange server, just standard IMAP. We still can't get it to work.
Sounds like you got bad service, or the rep misunderstood you when you said "corporate e-mail." But I can attest to exchange not being extra for individual accounts. My firm uses exchange, and all of my email, contacts, and calendar synced out of the box and my monthly statement has only two charges: 59.99 and 29.99. One for voice and the other for data.
Truthabout3G.com? Sigh. Again, AT&T just does not get it. Verizon is not bashing AT&T for their speed and features, but rather their lack of 3G AVAILABILITY. AT&T must truly be a bunch of morons.
They get it but it?s not like you can just put up towers whenever you feel like it. GSM-based nwtworks are very different from CDMA-based networks. AT&T is simply advertising the areas in which they do excel while Verizon is advertising the areas in which they excel. It?s marketing 101.
AT&T reportedly covers 75% of the US population with 3G. While this should be improved it?s more important to get towers in densely populated areas onto the better spectrum with more bandwidth to support more users.
Trying to do direct one-to-one network comparison is impossible due to the very different architectures and the ways in which each company formed to it?s current size due to acquisitions. At the end of the end it?s all about what company serves your needs the best. Since I spend my populated areas and like voice and data, AT&T is the carrier for me and they have exceeding my expectations of a carrier in the US.
That said, there current ad is weak. Using Luke WIlson convoluted and trivialized the technical benefits of AT&T over Verizon. And while they should advertise that they have the most sought after smartphone in the country on their network they should not be advertising that they have over 100k apps. That is not their app store. Verizon?s ad hit on a single fact and they hit it out of the ball park. AT&T really needs to get Apple?s PR people to work for them.
The iPhone has changed the entire carrier game. Everyone has had to expand and improve at that much faster a pace. If there were no iPhone, we wouldn't be seeing this battle between AT&T and Verizon. We wouldn't have seen the FCC step in with new guidelines and recommendations.
It is ALL about the iPhone - what it represents, the benefits, the challenges.
There would have still been battles between ATT and Verizon. Its called competition and believe it or not it would have still exsisted even without the iPhone.
There would have still been battles between ATT and Verizon. Its called competition and believe it or not it would have still exsisted even without the iPhone.
It looks like a simulation of competition, because we don't see and price drops of voice/data plans
It looks like a simulation of competition, because we don't see and price drops of voice/data plans
When the AT&T pricing for the iPhone first arrived the unlimited data was an unprecedented $20 while $40-50 were still the most common rates. On top of that the iPhone actually had the ability to actually utilize this data. Part of this ability to offer such a low rate is the requirement that all iPhones pay for it. This has sense been picked up by other carriers which allows them to subsidize these expensive phones further while netting more profit.
After that first year the unlimited data jumped to $30 with the drop of profit sharing and no longer included any SMS but it was still lower than the industry average before the iPhone hit the market. That could be coincidence or that could be the cause and effect. I can't say.
People want their phones to work. Dropped calls and spotty coverage are things that don't work.
When the AT&T pricing for the iPhone first arrived the unlimited data was an unprecedented $20 while $40-50 were still the most common rates. On top of that the iPhone actually had the ability to actually utilize this data. Part of this ability to offer such a low rate is the requirement that all iPhones pay for it. This has sense been picked up by other carriers which allows them to subsidize these expensive phones further while netting more profit.
After that first year the unlimited data jumped to $30 with the drop of profit sharing and no longer included any SMS but it was still lower than the industry average before the iPhone hit the market. That could be coincidence or that could be the cause and effect. I can't say.
wrong. vzw had a blackberry plan for $30 when the iphone came out. the other PDAs were a different story. i worked for vzw and they very much had it.