Thanks to advances in computer-generated technology, the images simply jump out at you from the TV screen, as all good commercials should: massive sheets of orange fabric covering up the Hollywood sign in Los Angeles and unfolding down the sides of buildings on the Las Vegas Strip, dropping from the top of the Gateway Arch in St. Louis, being unfurled by shiny happy people all along an East Coast beach. The late British singer-songwriter Nick Drake’s “From the Morning” lulls you into accepting all this as just another day in the U.S.
Things are not as simple as you imply: Apple cannot wave a magic wand and appear on Verizon. A Verizon CDMA iPhone would be far worse than AT&T's iPhone.
The reasons is that while Verizon has a good reputation for phone service, it is truly awful in Web services. iPhone users are accustomed to operating phone and web services simultaneously, but you cannot do that on CDMA technologies. Apple's reputation would suffer if it delivered a Verizon iPhone, so it is likely to wait until the Mobile Phone industry moves to LTE and 4G in two to three years. Meanwhile, Apple is forced to put up with ignorant articles like this one.
AT&T has been improving its 3G services, but it is always playing catch up. AT&T started off very late in the game; it had to spend billions to get up to 2.5G EDGE services for the original iPhone.
Mobile Phone services in San Francisco and New York City are special cases. Hills and tall building produce dead zones which cause dropped calls. It is unclear what AT&T will do about that. A Femto-cell alternative looks interesting, but it will take another year to roll that out.
I wish you had researched this topic, but if you had, then there would be no reason for another tedious article trashing Apple and AT&T. You would lose your chance to cast aspersions and unfounded accusations. It would make this trip unnecessary as you misinform your readers.
CDMA CAN provide both voice and data at the same time.
Verizon has decided they don't want to do it as it doubles the data rate to the device.
Verizon has taken the decision that they don't want ANGRY CUSTOMERS! AT&T took the decision they want to provide both voice and data at the same time, and screw the complaints.
I have always been on both carriers (though different names) since 1986. Both have pluses and both have negatives.
Overall, Verizon has MUCH better 3G, nearly everywhere.
On the other hand, while AT&T has maybe 5% of the 3G coverage, they have much better "cellular voice" and slow data coverage (EVDO).
I have to state that AT&T's ads have been VERY misleading.
Their 3G coverage SUCKS. Their overall coverage is likely better than Verizon, but what does that mean to road warriors? SLOW DATA!
Loading ...
Why Is Apple Tethering Itself to AT&T?
Posted by: Renay San Miguel May 28, 2010 05:00 AMThanks to advances in computer-generated technology, the images simply jump out at you from the TV screen, as all good commercials should: massive sheets of orange fabric covering up the Hollywood sign in Los Angeles and unfolding down the sides of buildings on the Las Vegas Strip, dropping from the top of the Gateway Arch in St. Louis, being unfurled by shiny happy people all along an East Coast beach. The late British singer-songwriter Nick Drake’s “From the Morning” lulls you into accepting all this as just another day in the U.S.
The reasons is that while Verizon has a good reputation for phone service, it is truly awful in Web services. iPhone users are accustomed to operating phone and web services simultaneously, but you cannot do that on CDMA technologies. Apple's reputation would suffer if it delivered a Verizon iPhone, so it is likely to wait until the Mobile Phone industry moves to LTE and 4G in two to three years. Meanwhile, Apple is forced to put up with ignorant articles like this one.
AT&T has been improving its 3G services, but it is always playing catch up. AT&T started off very late in the game; it had to spend billions to get up to 2.5G EDGE services for the original iPhone.
Mobile Phone services in San Francisco and New York City are special cases. Hills and tall building produce dead zones which cause dropped calls. It is unclear what AT&T will do about that. A Femto-cell alternative looks interesting, but it will take another year to roll that out.
I wish you had researched this topic, but if you had, then there would be no reason for another tedious article trashing Apple and AT&T. You would lose your chance to cast aspersions and unfounded accusations. It would make this trip unnecessary as you misinform your readers.
Verizon has decided they don't want to do it as it doubles the data rate to the device.
Verizon has taken the decision that they don't want ANGRY CUSTOMERS! AT&T took the decision they want to provide both voice and data at the same time, and screw the complaints.
I have always been on both carriers (though different names) since 1986. Both have pluses and both have negatives.
Overall, Verizon has MUCH better 3G, nearly everywhere.
On the other hand, while AT&T has maybe 5% of the 3G coverage, they have much better "cellular voice" and slow data coverage (EVDO).
I have to state that AT&T's ads have been VERY misleading.
Their 3G coverage SUCKS. Their overall coverage is likely better than Verizon, but what does that mean to road warriors? SLOW DATA!