- 02-04-2012, 11:59 AM #51
- 02-04-2012, 12:09 PM #52
- 02-04-2012, 12:13 PM #53
- 02-04-2012, 01:08 PM #54
- 02-04-2012, 10:20 PM #55
As an avid Android and iOS fan, I'm just throwing my 2 cents in...
LTE on Verizon is useless for anything but streaming, downloading, and talk/data at the same time. I've used it on a few phones, and it seriously provides little during average use. The difference among most things is negligible, at best.
I think the next iPhone will have 4G/LTE. But I hope (and would assume) that Apple will have the battery straightened out, or it's useless. I generally left 3G on instead of 4G because the idle battery drain was pointless. If I was home and near a charger, that's a different story.
Like I said, just my 2 cents.
- 02-04-2012, 11:02 PM #56
AT&T was the only carrier capable of even handling the load.
Verizon was given first shot at it and turned it down. AT&T got a great exclusivity deal from Apple as a result. Verizon kicked themselves for the next four years...
- 02-05-2012, 02:34 PM #57
- 02-05-2012, 03:53 PM #58
- 02-05-2012, 03:57 PM #59
Also, VZ did not need a deal with APPLE to be strong, ATT did. VZW experienced zero ill effect's by not having the iPhone. The churn numbers prove that. So, I would say they were not kicking themselves for those four years...
- 02-06-2012, 06:12 AM #60
Sent from my iPhone 4S using Tapatalk.
- 02-06-2012, 07:14 AM #61
So all the people chiming in saying what the Verizon deal "wasn't" still haven't shed much light as to why they turned down the iPhone back in 2006/2007. If you're going to shoot down people's comments, at least have the legitimacy to post relevant facts that prove stuff wrong.
The truth is, Verizon was more concerned about the iPhone itself if memory serves me correctly...mainly, Apples desire to keep sales, service and upgrades through themselves and give limited function to the carrier (primarily service providing and corporate store sales ONLY). Verizon wanted more control...so Apple went to Cingular because AT&T was just about to ink the deal and make the network incredibly large...spelling big $$$ signs for both companies, and they were willing to give Apple the control that appeased their wishes.
Verizon was foolish, since nothing has really changed (as far as control goes) from the first iPhone...they lost out on a lot of revenue and broader customer base by being bull headed on the control issue.
And personally, i think Verizon still wasn't sure that Apple was going to have success with the iPhone. Maybe a bit too much Microsoft prediction Kool-Aid in their diet at the time (since Gates thought the iPhone was going to be a flop).
Did it hurt Verizon? Not really, outside of investors who would have made out like the AT&T guys did over the first few years. The customers loyal to Verizon got to experience a slew of pretty terrible phones, putting lots of dollars in Palms and other obsolete handsets now...and then building a core of Android fans all the same.
And who really cares? They're all in the cash pool now.
- 02-06-2012, 07:43 AM #62
- 02-06-2012, 07:59 AM #63
I honestly think Tmobile missed the train for a couple of reasons...one is their network, while large, i think the data usage would overwhelm them (See: Sprint), and i also think the merger talk last year kind of eliminated the push for it for redundancies sake.
- 02-06-2012, 08:35 AM #64
- 02-06-2012, 01:29 PM #65
- 02-06-2012, 06:12 PM #66
- 02-06-2012, 09:31 PM #67
- 02-06-2012, 09:50 PM #68
- 02-06-2012, 10:28 PM #69
What AT$T will probably do is roll it out in a few big markets, and then advertise that they have "nationwide 4G", and milk it as long as they can. AT$T is not in business to provide good service, they are in business to make their shareholders as much money as possible in the short term.
If I get the iPhone 5 it will be with Verizon or Sprint, the throttling thing is the last straw.
- 02-07-2012, 05:46 PM #70
- 02-07-2012, 05:52 PM #71
- 02-07-2012, 05:59 PM #72
- 02-07-2012, 07:18 PM #73
- 02-10-2012, 01:06 PM #74
- 02-13-2012, 04:05 PM #75