If you were on trial in front of a jury, would you wear a suit? Would you prefer that your lawyer wore a suit to court as well or would having him show up in t-shirt and sandals be just fine?
It is true that AT&T is growing at a slightly faster rate than Verizon, and if things continue like this, AT&T will eventually catch Verizon. But Verizon's churn rate is slightly below AT&T's, while the rate for Spring and T-Mobile is double that of Verizon or AT&T. Are customers switching from Verizon to AT&T, or is AT&T soaking up customers from the 2 smaller carriers? It looks like the latter to me, but I haven't seen enough information to decide for sure.
From my limited experience, the Verizon customers I know are pretty loyal to that company.
I just jumped from T-Mobile to AT&T so I could get an iPhone. If they had the iPhone, I would have stayed.
Jobs is an exception to many rules. One of them is dress. Otherwise you get Phil Schiller up there on stage with Jobs, dressed in his hip, casual clothes, looking about as comfortable as I imagine Randall Stephenson would next to Jobs, dressed similarly.
And the definitions in OS X aren't provided by Apple. At the next shareholder's meeting, why don't we ask Steve if Apple has a position on the definition of a tuxedo as a suit! Knowing Steve, he probably would give you his opinion on the matter!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin
Apple disagrees with you:
I actually think he looks worse in suits, which is probably why he doesn't wear them.
I personally don't like people in suits or wearing suits. To me it suggests someone is being disingenuous. Someone in casual clothes however, they aren't making an attempt to gain my confidence by manipulating my perception of them, they prove themselves by their actions.
Corporate suits will congratulate each other, mimic each other and then stab each other in the back at any given opportunity. Give me a guy in jeans and a turtleneck any day. The respect aspect is dogmatic. You can't show much more respect than simply being polite. Lawyers wear suits and artists wear jeans - if I want to be around people who are passionate and genuine about what they do, I hang around with people in jeans.
People in suits are there because they have to be there, people in jeans are there because they want to be there. I can't think of any situation where I should be wearing a suit that I wouldn't rather be somewhere else.
There are exceptions of course as there are with everything but suits generally don't get my vote.
What is your reception like compared to AT&T? When I was on T-Mobile I don't remember having problems, but I wasn't nearly as demanding as I am now.
I'm in the Seattle area and I've had no reception problems with either company. I preferred T-Mobile because their voice plan was cheaper. I use very few minutes every month, so I liked the $29.99 plan. AT&T's cheapest plan is $10 more for 450 minutes - way more than I'll ever use in a month.
To me, this confirms the rumors that Apple has had a Verizon compatible phone waiting in the wings for some time now. They couldn't play chicken with AT&T without having that option ready.
edit:
And on second thought, maybe it confirms exactly the opposite. That Apple has put up with AT&T only because they don't have a Verizon solution.
Verizon, by all accounts, is worse than AT&T. They wouldn't even give Apple the time of day.
I started wearing a suit and tie to business meetings when I discovered that they would pay me an extra 100K a year to do it. I don't care what generation you are, if you want to be successful in business, you have to play the game. Go get yourself a cool neck tattoo and a pierced lip ring. You should be able to easily pull down six figures.
Are you a male formalwear fashion model? Otherwise, it says volumes about your company.
The Wired article should make for some interesting questions during AT&T's earnings call on Thursday morning. What the article alluded to but didn't really explain was that a lot of the problems have to do with antiquated backhaul infrastructure (backhaul refers to the bandwidth supplied to a cell tower site) and a lack of available licensed wireless spectrum for transmitting from towers to handsets.
AT&T can spend to improve backhaul -- it spent nearly $2 billion last year adding fiber and more T-1 lines to sites in San Francisco and New York alone -- but it is going to have to wait to get more spectrum, and in the meantime it will continue to deny there's a problem and sell you another iPhone.
Do users care? Are they figuring this out? How fast would they leave if Verizon got the iPhone? All questions to be answered...
Steve Jobs and Steve Wozniak used to sell "blue boxes" that let you make free long distance calls over AT&T's network. That was before Apple was founded. The irony, of course is that the same man responsible for sending AT&T millions of new customers (including myself) once sold products that let people steal from AT&T.
You guys in the US really are in a mess with this while AT&T aren't you. Here in the UK the iPhone is on 5 carriers now, with the previous exclusive carrier (O2) having lost their exclusivity some time ago now. I gather many other countries also have a choice of carriers with the iPhone, so what's gone wrong in the US? Why are you stuck with only one choice? Is this an uncommon situation or are most phones locked down like this in the US?
I was just in the UK, your cell services are nothing special - the quantity over quality approach isn't providing any greater benefit.
We just have a much bigger population which yields a greater number of whiners and a much, much bigger geographic area to consider. Now if you were talking about carrier service specifically in the Hawaiian Islands, then maybe a fair comparison could be made.
Apple really holds the majority of the cards here. Other carriers will likely drop their pants and bend over backwards should Apple shop around for a new carrier.
Actually Verizon has already stated they have been over the iPhone. They are all about Android phones now, and it has been great business for them. Why should they drop their pants for the iPhone when even Steve Jobs finally admits android is outselling the iPhone. That would be dumb. Android is growing more popular every day and since we are getting technology like wifi hotspots over a year ahead of Apple, why would we want to switch?
"The report also said that AT&T took issue with the fact that the iPhone uses a radio from Infineon, a company that previously had been most widely used in Europe, where cell towers are more common. AT&T allegedly felt that Apple's use of an Infineon chip led to inferior reception. When the wireless carrier asked Apple to resolve the issues "together," it was said that Apple's response was, "No, you resolve them. They're not our problem. They're your problem." "
If you choose to believe the other pieces of the article how can this be ignored? iPhone reception issues, long blamed on AT&T, now not only point to suspect antenna engineering but also to Apple's poor chip selection for the US market?
Didn't someone whine about "form over function?" Yet we know that the antenna engineer who designed the iPhone 4's antenna told Management that it was going to be a problem long before the design went gold. And now we know that Apple chose a radio chip that is known to work poorly in non-optimal signal areas, and knew it, and went ahead with it anyway.
Bottom line: Knowing all this, if you buy an iPhone, you deserve crappy service.
Didn't someone whine about "form over function?" Yet we know that the antenna engineer who designed the iPhone 4's antenna told Management that it was going to be a problem long before the design went gold. And now we know that Apple chose a radio chip that is known to work poorly in non-optimal signal areas, and knew it, and went ahead with it anyway.
Bottom line: Knowing all this, if you buy an iPhone, you deserve crappy service.
Is this an uncommon situation or are most phones locked down like this in the US?
In the USA, cell phones are usually locked to a single carrier. You can thank the GOBP for that, they've controlled the House and Senate most of the time when anyone was paying attention to what the cell carriers were doing, and the GOBP is more interested in fat profits for monopolists than they are in the good of the American people.
That would pretty much make you an a$$hole then., wishing roughly 400,000 folks out of work.
Ignorant people hoping other businesses fail. Get a grip.
If AT&T goes down, someone will buy their assets and it's almost certain the AT&T network will not be shut off. Someone will have to maintain all that stuff - and it's pretty unlikely you'll see the new owners getting 400,000 H-1B visas to import a bunch of low-wage workers to replace the people in place now.
Comments
Lawyers wear suits and artists wear jeans -
If you were on trial in front of a jury, would you wear a suit? Would you prefer that your lawyer wore a suit to court as well or would having him show up in t-shirt and sandals be just fine?
Verizon lost a bunch of money in Q4, but that was a one-time thing related to trimming some fat. Otherwise they are quite profitable.
http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/27/v...increasing-re/
What is more interesting is the link you provided.
http://gigaom.com/2010/03/04/u-s-mob...e-still-rocks/
It is true that AT&T is growing at a slightly faster rate than Verizon, and if things continue like this, AT&T will eventually catch Verizon. But Verizon's churn rate is slightly below AT&T's, while the rate for Spring and T-Mobile is double that of Verizon or AT&T. Are customers switching from Verizon to AT&T, or is AT&T soaking up customers from the 2 smaller carriers? It looks like the latter to me, but I haven't seen enough information to decide for sure.
From my limited experience, the Verizon customers I know are pretty loyal to that company.
I just jumped from T-Mobile to AT&T so I could get an iPhone. If they had the iPhone, I would have stayed.
And the definitions in OS X aren't provided by Apple. At the next shareholder's meeting, why don't we ask Steve if Apple has a position on the definition of a tuxedo as a suit! Knowing Steve, he probably would give you his opinion on the matter!
Apple disagrees with you:
I actually think he looks worse in suits, which is probably why he doesn't wear them.
I personally don't like people in suits or wearing suits. To me it suggests someone is being disingenuous. Someone in casual clothes however, they aren't making an attempt to gain my confidence by manipulating my perception of them, they prove themselves by their actions.
Corporate suits will congratulate each other, mimic each other and then stab each other in the back at any given opportunity. Give me a guy in jeans and a turtleneck any day. The respect aspect is dogmatic. You can't show much more respect than simply being polite. Lawyers wear suits and artists wear jeans - if I want to be around people who are passionate and genuine about what they do, I hang around with people in jeans.
People in suits are there because they have to be there, people in jeans are there because they want to be there. I can't think of any situation where I should be wearing a suit that I wouldn't rather be somewhere else.
There are exceptions of course as there are with everything but suits generally don't get my vote.
I just jumped from T-Mobile to AT&T so I could get an iPhone. If they had the iPhone, I would have stayed.
What is your reception like compared to AT&T? When I was on T-Mobile I don't remember having problems, but I wasn't nearly as demanding as I am now.
I'm in the Seattle area and I've had no reception problems with either company. I preferred T-Mobile because their voice plan was cheaper. I use very few minutes every month, so I liked the $29.99 plan. AT&T's cheapest plan is $10 more for 450 minutes - way more than I'll ever use in a month.
To me, this confirms the rumors that Apple has had a Verizon compatible phone waiting in the wings for some time now. They couldn't play chicken with AT&T without having that option ready.
edit:
And on second thought, maybe it confirms exactly the opposite. That Apple has put up with AT&T only because they don't have a Verizon solution.
Verizon, by all accounts, is worse than AT&T. They wouldn't even give Apple the time of day.
I started wearing a suit and tie to business meetings when I discovered that they would pay me an extra 100K a year to do it. I don't care what generation you are, if you want to be successful in business, you have to play the game. Go get yourself a cool neck tattoo and a pierced lip ring. You should be able to easily pull down six figures.
Are you a male formalwear fashion model? Otherwise, it says volumes about your company.
Are you a male formalwear fashion model? Otherwise, it says volumes about your company.
Commission baby!
Unshaven guy in jeans: Please, please buy our product. I'll give you a discount.
Client: No thanks.
Trim guy in suit: I'd like to sell you our product but I can't give any discounts.
Client: That's ok when can we take delivery?
Verizon, by all accounts, is worse than AT&T. They wouldn't even give Apple the time of day.
Maybe because Jobs did not wear a suit.
AT&T can spend to improve backhaul -- it spent nearly $2 billion last year adding fiber and more T-1 lines to sites in San Francisco and New York alone -- but it is going to have to wait to get more spectrum, and in the meantime it will continue to deny there's a problem and sell you another iPhone.
Do users care? Are they figuring this out? How fast would they leave if Verizon got the iPhone? All questions to be answered...
You guys in the US really are in a mess with this while AT&T aren't you. Here in the UK the iPhone is on 5 carriers now, with the previous exclusive carrier (O2) having lost their exclusivity some time ago now. I gather many other countries also have a choice of carriers with the iPhone, so what's gone wrong in the US? Why are you stuck with only one choice? Is this an uncommon situation or are most phones locked down like this in the US?
I was just in the UK, your cell services are nothing special - the quantity over quality approach isn't providing any greater benefit.
We just have a much bigger population which yields a greater number of whiners and a much, much bigger geographic area to consider. Now if you were talking about carrier service specifically in the Hawaiian Islands, then maybe a fair comparison could be made.
Apple really holds the majority of the cards here. Other carriers will likely drop their pants and bend over backwards should Apple shop around for a new carrier.
Actually Verizon has already stated they have been over the iPhone. They are all about Android phones now, and it has been great business for them. Why should they drop their pants for the iPhone when even Steve Jobs finally admits android is outselling the iPhone. That would be dumb. Android is growing more popular every day and since we are getting technology like wifi hotspots over a year ahead of Apple, why would we want to switch?
"The report also said that AT&T took issue with the fact that the iPhone uses a radio from Infineon, a company that previously had been most widely used in Europe, where cell towers are more common. AT&T allegedly felt that Apple's use of an Infineon chip led to inferior reception. When the wireless carrier asked Apple to resolve the issues "together," it was said that Apple's response was, "No, you resolve them. They're not our problem. They're your problem." "
If you choose to believe the other pieces of the article how can this be ignored? iPhone reception issues, long blamed on AT&T, now not only point to suspect antenna engineering but also to Apple's poor chip selection for the US market?
Didn't someone whine about "form over function?" Yet we know that the antenna engineer who designed the iPhone 4's antenna told Management that it was going to be a problem long before the design went gold. And now we know that Apple chose a radio chip that is known to work poorly in non-optimal signal areas, and knew it, and went ahead with it anyway.
Bottom line: Knowing all this, if you buy an iPhone, you deserve crappy service.
Didn't someone whine about "form over function?" Yet we know that the antenna engineer who designed the iPhone 4's antenna told Management that it was going to be a problem long before the design went gold. And now we know that Apple chose a radio chip that is known to work poorly in non-optimal signal areas, and knew it, and went ahead with it anyway.
Bottom line: Knowing all this, if you buy an iPhone, you deserve crappy service.
Scruffy seconds that.
Apple sets the gold standard for customer support
Sure they do. That's why the answer to the iPhone 4 antenna misdesign problem is "don't hold it that way."
Is this an uncommon situation or are most phones locked down like this in the US?
In the USA, cell phones are usually locked to a single carrier. You can thank the GOBP for that, they've controlled the House and Senate most of the time when anyone was paying attention to what the cell carriers were doing, and the GOBP is more interested in fat profits for monopolists than they are in the good of the American people.
That would pretty much make you an a$$hole then., wishing roughly 400,000 folks out of work.
Ignorant people hoping other businesses fail. Get a grip.
If AT&T goes down, someone will buy their assets and it's almost certain the AT&T network will not be shut off. Someone will have to maintain all that stuff - and it's pretty unlikely you'll see the new owners getting 400,000 H-1B visas to import a bunch of low-wage workers to replace the people in place now.
I suppose this is an illusion: Steve Jobs at Oscars.
Looks like a homeless guy in a tuxedo.