Results 46 to 60 of 222
- 01-21-2008, 02:00 PM #46BobGuest
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:210120081450519438%[email protected]:
> 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.
>
Actually, I'm not.
As far as providing documentation- ge, maybe you should search the FCC
archives.
› See More: SPRINT = a "meltdown," a "miserable performance" and a "disaster" - shares plunged 25.2 percent
- 01-21-2008, 02:02 PM #47John NavasGuest
Re: SPRINT = a "meltdown," a "miserable performance" and a "disaster" - shares plunged 25.2 percent
On Mon, 21 Jan 2008 11:46:52 -0800, "Kevin Weaver"
<[email protected]> wrote in
<[email protected]>:
>"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
>Here you go. Read it and weep.
>
>http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/01...d_down_iphone/
That's the same old same old BS based on Verizon spin.
Try again.
--
Best regards, FAQ FOR AT&T (CINGULAR) WIRELESS:
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/AT&T_Wireless_FAQ>
- 01-21-2008, 02:05 PM #48CharlesGuest
Re: SPRINT = a "meltdown," a "miserable performance" and a "disaster" - shares plunged 25.2 percent
In article <[email protected]>, Kevin Weaver
<[email protected]> wrote:
> 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.
Being posted here does not make it a fact. It is just something you
would like to be true. As Navas says the story from Verizon sounds like
sour grapes.
If Verizon could have had the iPhone and turned it down then in my
opinion they made a mistake. I don't think it would ever have been in
the cards though for Verizon to get it unless Cingular had turned it
down. They would want the GSM carrier because of the global market.
--
Charles
- 01-21-2008, 02:06 PM #49John NavasGuest
Re: SPRINT = a "meltdown," a "miserable performance" and a "disaster" - shares plunged 25.2 percent
On Mon, 21 Jan 2008 14:00:42 -0600, Bob <[email protected]> wrote in
<[email protected]>:
>Charles <[email protected]> amazed us all with the following
>in news:210120081450519438%[email protected]:
>
>> 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.
>
>Actually, I'm not.
>
>As far as providing documentation- ge, maybe you should search the FCC
>archives.
In other words, you don't have anything to back that up.
--
Best regards, FAQ FOR AT&T (CINGULAR) WIRELESS:
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/AT&T_Wireless_FAQ>
- 01-21-2008, 02:07 PM #50John NavasGuest
Re: SPRINT = a "meltdown," a "miserable performance" and a "disaster" - shares plunged 25.2 percent
On Mon, 21 Jan 2008 15:05:35 -0500, Charles
<[email protected]> wrote in
<210120081505352479%[email protected]>:
>In article <[email protected]>, Kevin Weaver
><[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> 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.
>
>Being posted here does not make it a fact. It is just something you
>would like to be true. As Navas says the story from Verizon sounds like
>sour grapes.
>
>If Verizon could have had the iPhone and turned it down then in my
>opinion they made a mistake. I don't think it would ever have been in
>the cards though for Verizon to get it unless Cingular had turned it
>down. They would want the GSM carrier because of the global market.
Apple almost certainly solicited bids from both carriers, and took the
best deal for Apple. That's commonly called a "beauty contest", which
Verizon lost, and did it's best to explain away.
--
Best regards, FAQ FOR AT&T (CINGULAR) WIRELESS:
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/AT&T_Wireless_FAQ>
- 01-21-2008, 02:09 PM #51ScottGuest
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:210120081505352479%[email protected]:
> In article <[email protected]>, Kevin Weaver
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> 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.
>
> Being posted here does not make it a fact. It is just something you
> would like to be true. As Navas says the story from Verizon sounds
> like sour grapes.
>
> If Verizon could have had the iPhone and turned it down then in my
> opinion they made a mistake.
Why? When comparing Verizon and AT&T, the iPhone does not appear to be
giving AT&T any competitive advantage. Verizon keeps up in terms of net
adds, and shows a much higher profit per subscriber.
> I don't think it would ever have been in
> the cards though for Verizon to get it unless Cingular had turned it
> down. They would want the GSM carrier because of the global market.
Except for the fact that it is well documented that they went to Verizon
first. Despite your delusions and inability to accept the fact, VERZION
TURNED DOWN APPLE!
>
- 01-21-2008, 02:11 PM #52CharlesGuest
Re: SPRINT = a "meltdown," a "miserable performance" and a "disaster" - shares plunged 25.2 percent
In article <[email protected]>, Kevin Weaver
<[email protected]> wrote:
> Here you go. Read it and weep.
>
> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/01...d_down_iphone/
That article is not proof. It is just a claim. It is not backed up that
Verizon was offered it first. That article also claims that Rogers
communication in Canada was signed to be the Canadian carrier. That
might happen someday but so far it has not. So much for the accuracy of
The Register.
--
Charles
- 01-21-2008, 02:12 PM #53BobGuest
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 14:00:42 -0600, Bob <[email protected]> wrote in
> <[email protected]>:
>
>>Charles <[email protected]> amazed us all with the following
>>in news:210120081450519438%[email protected]:
>>
>>> 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.
>>
>>Actually, I'm not.
>>
>>As far as providing documentation- ge, maybe you should search the FCC
>>archives.
>
> In other words, you don't have anything to back that up.
>
In other words, I've backed it up a dozen times before. You've even
acknowledged and tried to argue against the fact before, arguing why they
developed a CDMA phone first. I don't have any need to play to your lack
of knowledge or memory issues.
You suck at trying to play both sides of the fence. Actually, you just
plain suck.
- 01-21-2008, 02:13 PM #54CharlesGuest
Re: SPRINT = a "meltdown," a "miserable performance" and a "disaster" - shares plunged 25.2 percent
In article <[email protected]>, Bob <[email protected]>
wrote:
> Actually, I'm not.
>
> As far as providing documentation- ge, maybe you should search the FCC
> archives.
You are the one making the claim. It is you who should go to the FCC
archive and come back with documentation. Lots of Luck!!!
--
Charles
- 01-21-2008, 02:13 PM #55ScottGuest
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 15:05:35 -0500, Charles
> <[email protected]> wrote in
> <210120081505352479%[email protected]>:
>
>>In article <[email protected]>, Kevin Weaver
>><[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> 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.
>>
>>Being posted here does not make it a fact. It is just something you
>>would like to be true. As Navas says the story from Verizon sounds
>>like sour grapes.
>>
>>If Verizon could have had the iPhone and turned it down then in my
>>opinion they made a mistake. I don't think it would ever have been in
>>the cards though for Verizon to get it unless Cingular had turned it
>>down. They would want the GSM carrier because of the global market.
>
> Apple almost certainly solicited bids from both carriers, and took the
> best deal for Apple. That's commonly called a "beauty contest", which
> Verizon lost, and did it's best to explain away.
>
Almost certainly? Is that Novice Bull**** for , "John doesn't have a
clue?"
Stop postulating and start providing facts. Your pedestrian consumer
knowledge of the subject does not put you in a position to provide
"guesses."
- 01-21-2008, 02:15 PM #56ScottGuest
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:210120081513280803%[email protected]:
> In article <[email protected]>, Bob <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> Actually, I'm not.
>>
>> As far as providing documentation- ge, maybe you should search the FCC
>> archives.
>
> You are the one making the claim. It is you who should go to the FCC
> archive and come back with documentation. Lots of Luck!!!
>
Lots of luck in what? Proving that you are simple an annoying little
fanboi? Too late- you've done the job for me.
- 01-21-2008, 02:16 PM #57John NavasGuest
Re: SPRINT = a "meltdown," a "miserable performance" and a "disaster" - shares plunged 25.2 percent
On Mon, 21 Jan 2008 14:12:11 -0600, Bob <[email protected]> wrote in
<[email protected]>:
>John Navas <[email protected]> amazed us all with the following in
>news:[email protected]:
>
>> On Mon, 21 Jan 2008 14:00:42 -0600, Bob <[email protected]> wrote in
>> <[email protected]>:
>>
>>>Charles <[email protected]> amazed us all with the following
>>>in news:210120081450519438%[email protected]:
>>>
>>>> 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.
>>>
>>>Actually, I'm not.
>>>
>>>As far as providing documentation- ge, maybe you should search the FCC
>>>archives.
>>
>> In other words, you don't have anything to back that up.
>
>In other words, I've backed it up a dozen times before. You've even
>acknowledged and tried to argue against the fact before, arguing why they
>developed a CDMA phone first. I don't have any need to play to your lack
>of knowledge or memory issues.
>
>You suck at trying to play both sides of the fence. Actually, you just
>plain suck.
I didn't think so. Thanks for the confirmation.
--
Best regards, FAQ FOR AT&T (CINGULAR) WIRELESS:
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/AT&T_Wireless_FAQ>
- 01-21-2008, 02:19 PM #58ScottGuest
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 14:12:11 -0600, Bob <[email protected]> wrote in
> <[email protected]>:
>
>>John Navas <[email protected]> amazed us all with the
>>following in news:[email protected]:
>>
>>> On Mon, 21 Jan 2008 14:00:42 -0600, Bob <[email protected]> wrote in
>>> <[email protected]>:
>>>
>>>>Charles <[email protected]> amazed us all with the
>>>>following in news:210120081450519438%[email protected]:
>>>>
>>>>> 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.
>>>>
>>>>Actually, I'm not.
>>>>
>>>>As far as providing documentation- ge, maybe you should search the
>>>>FCC archives.
>>>
>>> In other words, you don't have anything to back that up.
>>
>>In other words, I've backed it up a dozen times before. You've even
>>acknowledged and tried to argue against the fact before, arguing why
>>they developed a CDMA phone first. I don't have any need to play to
>>your lack of knowledge or memory issues.
>>
>>You suck at trying to play both sides of the fence. Actually, you
>>just plain suck.
>
> I didn't think
And you normally don't. It's not news to many of us.
- 01-21-2008, 02:19 PM #59CharlesGuest
Re: SPRINT = a "meltdown," a "miserable performance" and a "disaster" - shares plunged 25.2 percent
In article <[email protected]>, John Navas
<[email protected]> wrote:
> Apple almost certainly solicited bids from both carriers, and took the
> best deal for Apple. That's commonly called a "beauty contest", which
> Verizon lost, and did it's best to explain away.
I do think that is likely. But unless they would have offered it on
both carriers I think they would have given preference to the GSM
carrier. Because of the Global market.
--
Charles
- 01-21-2008, 02:22 PM #60CharlesGuest
Re: SPRINT = a "meltdown," a "miserable performance" and a "disaster" - shares plunged 25.2 percent
In article <[email protected]>, Scott
<[email protected]> wrote:
> Lots of luck in what? Proving that you are simple an annoying little
> fanboi? Too late- you've done the job for me.
In other words you can't back up your assertion so you resort to drivel.
--
Charles
Similar Threads
- Samsung
- alt.cellular.attws
- alt.cellular.verizon
A corporate employee purchase program
in Chit Chat