Page 3 of 15 FirstFirst 1234513 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 222
  1. #31
    DTC
    Guest

    Re: SPRINT = a "meltdown," a "miserable performance" and a "disaster"- shares plunged 25.2 percent

    Tim Smith wrote:
    > Is it accurate to say AT&T "beat out" Verizon for the iPhone? Most
    > reports are that Apple when to Verizon first, and Verizon turned them
    > down.


    More likely it was like two dance partners wanting to lead and the
    date was over early in the evening.



    See More: SPRINT = a "meltdown," a "miserable performance" and a "disaster" - shares plunged 25.2 percent




  2. #32
    John Navas
    Guest

    Re: SPRINT = a "meltdown," a "miserable performance" and a "disaster" - shares plunged 25.2 percent

    On Sun, 20 Jan 2008 22:35:04 -0800, Tim Smith
    <[email protected]> wrote in
    <[email protected]>:

    >In article <[email protected]>,
    > John Navas <[email protected]> wrote:
    >> The bet by AT&T on GSM and 3G looks has been paying off well, and
    >> beating out Verizon for the iPhone has made it the strongest player in
    >> the U.S. market.

    >
    >Is it accurate to say AT&T "beat out" Verizon for the iPhone?


    Yes.

    >Most
    >reports are that Apple when to Verizon first, and Verizon turned them
    >down.


    That's all from one story based on spin from Verizon.

    --
    Best regards, FAQ FOR AT&T (CINGULAR) WIRELESS:
    John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/AT&T_Wireless_FAQ>



  3. #33
    Scott
    Guest

    Re: SPRINT = a "meltdown," a "miserable performance" and a "disaster" - shares plunged 25.2 percent

    John Navas <[email protected]> amazed us all with the following in
    news:[email protected]:

    > On Sun, 20 Jan 2008 22:35:04 -0800, Tim Smith
    > <[email protected]> wrote in
    > <[email protected]>:
    >
    >>In article <[email protected]>,
    >> John Navas <[email protected]> wrote:
    >>> The bet by AT&T on GSM and 3G looks has been paying off well, and
    >>> beating out Verizon for the iPhone has made it the strongest player in
    >>> the U.S. market.

    >>
    >>Is it accurate to say AT&T "beat out" Verizon for the iPhone?

    >
    > Yes.
    >
    >>Most
    >>reports are that Apple when to Verizon first, and Verizon turned them
    >>down.

    >
    > That's all from one story based on spin from Verizon.
    >


    Actually, it is based on every story told that does not come form a doamin
    having anything to do with Apple.

    Quit pouting- you were wrong on this (as you are on many things), Novice.



  4. #34
    Robert Coe
    Guest

    Re: SPRINT = a "meltdown," a "miserable performance" and a "disaster" - shares plunged 25.2 percent

    On Mon, 21 Jan 2008 15:44:52 GMT, John Navas <[email protected]>
    wrote:
    : On Sun, 20 Jan 2008 22:35:04 -0800, Tim Smith
    : <[email protected]> wrote in
    : <[email protected]>:
    :
    : >In article <[email protected]>,
    : > John Navas <[email protected]> wrote:
    : >> The bet by AT&T on GSM and 3G looks has been paying off well, and
    : >> beating out Verizon for the iPhone has made it the strongest player in
    : >> the U.S. market.
    : >
    : >Is it accurate to say AT&T "beat out" Verizon for the iPhone?
    :
    : Yes.
    :
    : >Most
    : >reports are that Apple when to Verizon first, and Verizon turned them
    : >down.
    :
    : That's all from one story based on spin from Verizon.

    From Apple's point of view, there are really only two believable
    possibilities:

    1. Apple thought they could easily produce a CDMA version of the iPhone, in
    which case they would have happily sold the rights to both companies.

    2. They didn't, in which case the deck was stacked against Verizon, who would
    have had to pay Apple enough to cover whatever the development cost turned out
    to be. So Verizon might very well have "turned them down".

    For whatever reason (and I'll bet I know what John will say it is), unusual
    phones often seem to appear in GSM form first. Note that the CDMA version of
    the Blackberry Pearl lagged the GSM version by almost a year and that there is
    still no CDMA version of the Blackberry Curve.

    Bob



  5. #35
    John Navas
    Guest

    Re: SPRINT = a "meltdown," a "miserable performance" and a "disaster" - shares plunged 25.2 percent

    On Mon, 21 Jan 2008 11:41:35 -0500, Robert Coe <[email protected]> wrote in
    <[email protected]>:

    >From Apple's point of view, there are really only two believable
    >possibilities:
    >
    >1. Apple thought they could easily produce a CDMA version of the iPhone, in
    >which case they would have happily sold the rights to both companies.
    >
    >2. They didn't, in which case the deck was stacked against Verizon, who would
    >have had to pay Apple enough to cover whatever the development cost turned out
    >to be. So Verizon might very well have "turned them down".


    3. Apple maximized profit by granting an exclusive to one carrier in a
    given market (consistent with industry practice); GSM was the best
    technology to serve worldwide markets; and AT&T gave it the best deal.

    --
    Best regards, FAQ FOR AT&T (CINGULAR) WIRELESS:
    John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/AT&T_Wireless_FAQ>



  6. #36
    Kevin Weaver
    Guest

    Re: SPRINT = a "meltdown," a "miserable performance" and a "disaster" - shares plunged 25.2 percent

    "John Navas" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    > On Sun, 20 Jan 2008 22:35:04 -0800, Tim Smith
    > <[email protected]> wrote in
    > <[email protected]>:
    >
    >>In article <[email protected]>,
    >> John Navas <[email protected]> wrote:
    >>> The bet by AT&T on GSM and 3G looks has been paying off well, and
    >>> beating out Verizon for the iPhone has made it the strongest player in
    >>> the U.S. market.

    >>
    >>Is it accurate to say AT&T "beat out" Verizon for the iPhone?

    >
    > Yes.
    >
    >>Most
    >>reports are that Apple when to Verizon first, and Verizon turned them
    >>down.

    >
    > That's all from one story based on spin from Verizon.
    >
    > --
    > Best regards, FAQ FOR AT&T (CINGULAR) WIRELESS:
    > John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/AT&T_Wireless_FAQ>


    Bull**** and Navas knows it. It's been shown that they "Verizon" was offered
    it 1st but turned it down.





  7. #37
    Charles
    Guest

    Re: SPRINT = a "meltdown," a "miserable performance" and a "disaster" - shares plunged 25.2 percent

    In article <[email protected]>, Kevin Weaver
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    > Bull**** and Navas knows it. It's been shown that they "Verizon" was offered
    > it 1st but turned it down.


    Bull**** yourself. It has not been shown Verizon was offered it first.
    If Verizon were offered it and turned it down then they made a mistake.


    If you think about it logically Apple would have preferred AT&T because
    they use GSM which is used in many world markets.

    Wired has an interesting account on the development of the iPhone.

    http://www.wired.com/gadgets/wireles...6-02/ff_iphone

    --
    Charles



  8. #38
    Scott
    Guest

    Re: SPRINT = a "meltdown," a "miserable performance" and a "disaster" - shares plunged 25.2 percent

    Charles <[email protected]> amazed us all with the following
    in news:210120081323073570%[email protected]:

    > In article <[email protected]>, Kevin Weaver
    > <[email protected]> wrote:
    >
    >> Bull**** and Navas knows it. It's been shown that they "Verizon" was
    >> offered it 1st but turned it down.

    >
    > Bull**** yourself. It has not been shown Verizon was offered it first.
    > If Verizon were offered it and turned it down then they made a
    > mistake.
    >
    >
    > If you think about it logically Apple would have preferred AT&T
    > because they use GSM which is used in many world markets.


    And if this were true, the first iPhone submitted to the FCC would have
    been GSM and not CDMA (as it was).


    >
    > Wired has an interesting account on the development of the iPhone.
    >
    > http://www.wired.com/gadgets/wireles...6-02/ff_iphone
    >





  9. #39
    Charles
    Guest

    Re: SPRINT = a "meltdown," a "miserable performance" and a "disaster" - shares plunged 25.2 percent

    In article <[email protected]>, Scott
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    > And if this were true, the first iPhone submitted to the FCC would have
    > been GSM and not CDMA (as it was).


    Wrong. There never was a CDMA iPhone phone submitted to the FCC.

    --
    Charles



  10. #40
    Bob
    Guest

    Re: SPRINT = a "meltdown," a "miserable performance" and a "disaster" - shares plunged 25.2 percent

    Charles <[email protected]> amazed us all with the following in
    news:210120081345495284%[email protected]:

    > In article <[email protected]>, Scott
    > <[email protected]> wrote:
    >
    >> And if this were true, the first iPhone submitted to the FCC would have
    >> been GSM and not CDMA (as it was).

    >
    > Wrong. There never was a CDMA iPhone phone submitted to the FCC.
    >


    Not submitted as the iPhone (as the marketing name had not been decided
    upon yet), but the first phone submitted to the FCC by Apple was indeed
    CDMA. The GSM version was rushed out after the decision to go with AT&T.

    No need to make this up- it's all well documented.



  11. #41
    John Navas
    Guest

    Re: SPRINT = a "meltdown," a "miserable performance" and a "disaster" - shares plunged 25.2 percent

    On Mon, 21 Jan 2008 13:03:36 -0600, Bob <[email protected]> wrote in
    <[email protected]>:

    >Charles <[email protected]> amazed us all with the following in
    >news:210120081345495284%[email protected]:
    >
    >> In article <[email protected]>, Scott
    >> <[email protected]> wrote:
    >>
    >>> And if this were true, the first iPhone submitted to the FCC would have
    >>> been GSM and not CDMA (as it was).

    >>
    >> Wrong. There never was a CDMA iPhone phone submitted to the FCC.

    >
    >Not submitted as the iPhone (as the marketing name had not been decided
    >upon yet), but the first phone submitted to the FCC by Apple was indeed
    >CDMA. The GSM version was rushed out after the decision to go with AT&T.
    >
    >No need to make this up- it's all well documented.


    Really? Then you'll have no problem backing that up with authoritative
    evidence. Otherwise it's no more persuasive than any other
    unsubstantiated claim.

    --
    Best regards, FAQ FOR AT&T (CINGULAR) WIRELESS:
    John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/AT&T_Wireless_FAQ>



  12. #42
    Kevin Weaver
    Guest

    Re: SPRINT = a "meltdown," a "miserable performance" and a "disaster" - shares plunged 25.2 percent

    "Charles" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:210120081323073570%[email protected]...
    > In article <[email protected]>, Kevin Weaver
    > <[email protected]> wrote:
    >
    >> Bull**** and Navas knows it. It's been shown that they "Verizon" was
    >> offered
    >> it 1st but turned it down.

    >
    > Bull**** yourself. It has not been shown Verizon was offered it first.
    > If Verizon were offered it and turned it down then they made a mistake.
    >
    >
    > If you think about it logically Apple would have preferred AT&T because
    > they use GSM which is used in many world markets.
    >
    > Wired has an interesting account on the development of the iPhone.
    >
    > http://www.wired.com/gadgets/wireles...6-02/ff_iphone
    >
    > --
    > Charles


    Google is your friend. Try it sometime.
    It's been posted here many time's when Navas 1st shot off his trap about the
    very same thing.




  13. #43
    Kevin Weaver
    Guest

    Re: SPRINT = a "meltdown," a "miserable performance" and a "disaster" - shares plunged 25.2 percent

    "Charles" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:210120081323073570%[email protected]...
    > In article <[email protected]>, Kevin Weaver
    > <[email protected]> wrote:
    >
    >> Bull**** and Navas knows it. It's been shown that they "Verizon" was
    >> offered
    >> it 1st but turned it down.

    >
    > Bull**** yourself. It has not been shown Verizon was offered it first.
    > If Verizon were offered it and turned it down then they made a mistake.
    >
    >
    > If you think about it logically Apple would have preferred AT&T because
    > they use GSM which is used in many world markets.
    >
    > Wired has an interesting account on the development of the iPhone.
    >
    > http://www.wired.com/gadgets/wireles...6-02/ff_iphone
    >
    > --
    > Charles



    Here you go. Read it and weep.

    http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/01...d_down_iphone/





  14. #44
    Charles
    Guest

    Re: SPRINT = a "meltdown," a "miserable performance" and a "disaster" - shares plunged 25.2 percent

    In article <[email protected]>, Bob <[email protected]>
    wrote:

    > Not submitted as the iPhone (as the marketing name had not been decided
    > upon yet), but the first phone submitted to the FCC by Apple was indeed
    > CDMA. The GSM version was rushed out after the decision to go with AT&T.
    >
    > No need to make this up- it's all well documented.


    If it is documented, prove it. You won't be able to. You are
    misinformed.

    --
    Charles



  15. #45
    Scott
    Guest

    Re: SPRINT = a "meltdown," a "miserable performance" and a "disaster" - shares plunged 25.2 percent

    John Navas <[email protected]> amazed us all with the following
    in news:[email protected]:

    > On Mon, 21 Jan 2008 13:03:36 -0600, Bob <[email protected]> wrote in
    > <[email protected]>:
    >
    >>Charles <[email protected]> amazed us all with the following
    >>in news:210120081345495284%[email protected]:
    >>
    >>> In article <[email protected]>, Scott
    >>> <[email protected]> wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> And if this were true, the first iPhone submitted to the FCC would
    >>>> have been GSM and not CDMA (as it was).
    >>>
    >>> Wrong. There never was a CDMA iPhone phone submitted to the FCC.

    >>
    >>Not submitted as the iPhone (as the marketing name had not been
    >>decided upon yet), but the first phone submitted to the FCC by Apple
    >>was indeed CDMA. The GSM version was rushed out after the decision to
    >>go with AT&T.
    >>
    >>No need to make this up- it's all well documented.

    >
    > Really? Then you'll have no problem backing that up with
    > authoritative evidence. Otherwise it's no more persuasive than any
    > other unsubstantiated claim.
    >


    Google is your friend, Novice.



  • Similar Threads




  • Page 3 of 15 FirstFirst 1234513 ... LastLast