Verizon lowers the boom (so to speak)

[1jaxstate1]

AndroidCentral suggest that the google wallet not coming to the new GN could be due to the deal that Google has with Sprint.

How is LTE overhyped? It's damn sure faster. It's not a selling point for me, a good 3G signal will suffice for me, but LTE is much faster than 3G/4G*.

I think we've had big hints that LTE is coming in early 2012 so there really is no indication of MS dragging their feet, Verizon is basically just doing what they do best, throwing their weight around, just like they've done with google wallet to give their system an advantage. No Google Wallet on Verizon's coming Galaxy Nexus - Computerworld.

Microsoft has a roadmap, and they have done a lot in one year and are still working to improve. LTE is just one tech, overhyped to sell new contracts to those who are told to believe bigger, faster is better. Its coming, no need to make a big deal out of it.

 

[theefman]

AndroidCentral suggest that the google wallet not coming to the new GN could be due to the deal that Google has with Sprint.

How is LTE overhyped? It's damn sure faster. It's not a selling point for me, a good 3G signal will suffice for me, but LTE is much faster than 3G/4G*.

The wallet info may be incorrect, so I've removed that reference, guess we'll see how that turns out.

As for being overhyped, is there anything you cant do now on your current 3G phone, assuming it has the requisite hardware, that an LTE phone will do? Tethering, video chat? Are your download speeds that slow? Remember these are all theoritical speeds that depend on many factors, and just saying a phone is 4G or LTE doesnt guarantee anything. This story is an example http://www.windowscentral.com/att-dialing-back-4g-speeds-windows-phones.

Yes, its faster but personally, just like you, its not a selling point because I dont feel I am currently hindered by the speeds I am getting now. Unless there is some new function that requires faster speeds I think its overhyped and just being used to sell new devices.

 

[Umm Yeah]

I agree that LTE isn't a selling point for me either, as I tend to use WiFi whenever possible and that typically beats LTE speeds as well as not using any of my limited bandwidth on the cell network. I personally would rather do without Verizon's typical $100 LTE premium and get a second generation WP7.5 device with 3G. But obviously that doesn't fit in with their business plans.

 

[canesfan625]

The wallet info may be incorrect, so I've removed that reference, guess we'll see how that turns out.

As for being overhyped, is there anything you cant do now on your current 3G phone, assuming it has the requisite hardware, that an LTE phone will do? Tethering, video chat? Are your download speeds that slow? Remember these are all theoritical speeds that depend on many factors, and just saying a phone is 4G or LTE doesnt guarantee anything. This story is an example http://www.windowscentral.com/att-dialing-back-4g-speeds-windows-phones.

Yes, its faster but personally, just like you, its not a selling point because I dont feel I am currently hindered by the speeds I am getting now. Unless there is some new function that requires faster speeds I think its overhyped and just being used to sell new devices.

If they throw large enough numbers out maybe people will forget that you're sharing bandwidth with the other zillion people using the same tower

 

[Joelist]

Sorry but LTE is WAY faster and not just theoretically. I have an LTE device and the difference in performance on any network involved task between it and its 3G forebears is night and day.

Also, LTE is a MAJOR selling point. Verizon has the best and largest LTE and they hype it constantly in ads aimed to show ordinary folk the advantages. Go into one of their stores - they steer customers to Android and within Android LTE first. They may have posters for other phones (like the iPhone) but when the sales consultants steer people to Androids and LTE it's hardly surprising that LTE Androids sell like crazy with non-LTE Androids next, then iPhones then RIM then WP7.

 

[Joelist]

It is not wrong, and that is a childish way to respond to a post. The arrogance at Verizon did cause them to miss out on the iPhone. You can bet they kicked themselves in rear for that one.

And you are avoiding my other point. The iPhone 4 S was released almost at the same time as Mango and the Mango devices. Yet, Verizon didn't tell Apple they would not promote their new device because it lacked LTE. It was their previous stupidity with Apple that burned them, and now they are afraid to jeopardize that relationship again.

Verizon is notorious for their stupid decisions. How about locking out the GPS on devices for years. The only way to unlock the GPS was to pay for navigation service. They were also the worst for removing or changing features and creating device restrictions.

Their attitude is harmful to consumers as well. They are very Apple-like in this way. Bypass competition through restrictions. They have improved in recent years, but this is still Verizon we are talking about. This nonsense about LTE is laughable at best.

Sorry you took it wrong, but Apple was trying to hold Verizon over a barrel on the iPhone and Verizon walked away and built their own smartphone market with Android. Then they let Apple in under much better terms, and note that they don't go out of their way to push the iPhone. Even with Apple in the stores the reps all still steer people to Android and especially LTE.

You may not like Verizon but they are the #1 carrier for good reasons. They have the largest and most robust network and they don't sit on their hands. The speed of their LTE rollout (which surprised more than a few experts) is evidence of this. Also their customer support is very good especially at the point of sale.

That said, they do have warts (as do all people and companies). They enforce strange restrictions (like the preloaded Verizon software or in the past when they always disabled the bluetooth tethering profile) and sometimes their decisions are outright bizarre. But they are the big player in the US market and for them to send a message like this to MS is noth bad and good.

Bad because it means they might drop Windows Phone but good because they are telling MS and the OEMs what needs to happen for them to back it.

 

[1jaxstate1]

And that's the case with every carrier. Higher speeds are better since the max will never be reached once multiple people start hitting the tower. So would you want to share a tower with a "zillion" people at a max speed of 7Mbps or a tower with a "zillion" people with a max speed of 40Mbps.

If they throw large enough numbers out maybe people will forget that you're sharing bandwidth with the other zillion people using the same tower

I'd rather be on the 40Mbps connection that gets slowed down to 12Mbps once everyone starts hitting the tower over the 7Mbps connection that gets slowed down to 200kbps once everyone starts hitting it.

 

[Umm Yeah]

Sorry but LTE is WAY faster and not just theoretically. I have an LTE device and the difference in performance on any network involved task between it and its 3G forebears is night and day.

Also, LTE is a MAJOR selling point. Verizon has the best and largest LTE and they hype it constantly in ads aimed to show ordinary folk the advantages. Go into one of their stores - they steer customers to Android and within Android LTE first. They may have posters for other phones (like the iPhone) but when the sales consultants steer people to Androids and LTE it's hardly surprising that LTE Androids sell like crazy with non-LTE Androids next, then iPhones then RIM then WP7.

I have no issue with LTE. I just don't want to pay a $100 premium to access it while bandwidth restrictions grow tighter. I can use WiFi for free and the speeds tend to be faster that the real world LTE speeds on Verizon.

Yes, Verizon does steer people toward LTE phones and Androids are the only ones. But LTE also kills battery life. They steer them there because that's where the money is.

And Apple didn't exactly come with their tail between their legs to Verizon with the iPhone. They still extracted a better deal than any other OEM. Do you see the Verizon brand on the iPhone? No. It's the only phone Verizon sells that doesn't have it. Do you see all the Verizon bloatware pre-installed on the iPhone? Nope. Again, only the iPhone.

Personally, I'm stuck with Verizon due to work. I didn't want an iPhone and I didn't want an Android. I held out for the second generation WP7.5 devices on Verizon but I had to finally give up. I have a new BlackBerry Torch 9850. It's not as good as the second generation WP7.5 phones but given that my choice was limited to Verizon and either BlackBerry or the HTC Trophy, I decided to start my two year clock running and hope that WP8 will be out in 2013. It'll have LTE and all the bells and whistles to be sure... or it won't be on Verizon at all... We'll just have to see.

 

[naplesbill]

Sorry you took it wrong, but Apple was trying to hold Verizon over a barrel on the iPhone and Verizon walked away and built their own smartphone market with Android. Then they let Apple in under much better terms, and note that they don't go out of their way to push the iPhone. Even with Apple in the stores the reps all still steer people to Android and especially LTE.

You may not like Verizon but they are the #1 carrier for good reasons. They have the largest and most robust network and they don't sit on their hands. The speed of their LTE rollout (which surprised more than a few experts) is evidence of this. Also their customer support is very good especially at the point of sale.

That said, they do have warts (as do all people and companies). They enforce strange restrictions (like the preloaded Verizon software or in the past when they always disabled the bluetooth tethering profile) and sometimes their decisions are outright bizarre. But they are the big player in the US market and for them to send a message like this to MS is noth bad and good.

Bad because it means they might drop Windows Phone but good because they are telling MS and the OEMs what needs to happen for them to back it.

Sorry, I just get annoyed when people start a conversation with the word wrong. This is supposed to be a discussion not a battle.

We still have a Verizon account at work. We used to have all of our phones (over 60 smartphones)on Verizon. Verizon has been spamming my inbox with iPhone marketing ever since it was announced to be coming to Verizon.

We have switched most of our phones to AT&T because AT&T has better coverage in SW Florida than Verizon. The only devices still on Verizon are all tied to the CEO as he has a home in Vermont as well as here in Florida. The reason AT&T is better here is mostly because Verizon uses high frequencies here. Higher frequencies have less indoor penetration. They also became the largest carrier by buying Alltel and not from building up their customers to overtake AT&T. Once all the Alltel devices are eliminated, Verizon will be able to utilize the lower freqency band that Alltel is currently occupying.

On a side note, I find it curious that the FCC didn't take issue with the Alltel merger with the same fury as they have with AT&T/T-Mobile.

As a business customer, Verizon is even worse than they are when you are a normal consumer. They do not care what you need, just what you have to pay them. AT&T, even though they are also in the business to make money, is far more willing to provide solutions for us. In all honesty, all cellular carriers in the US suck. Alltel was great, but they are gone.

 

[theefman]

Sorry but LTE is WAY faster and not just theoretically. I have an LTE device and the difference in performance on any network involved task between it and its 3G forebears is night and day.

Also, LTE is a MAJOR selling point. Verizon has the best and largest LTE and they hype it constantly in ads aimed to show ordinary folk the advantages. Go into one of their stores - they steer customers to Android and within Android LTE first. They may have posters for other phones (like the iPhone) but when the sales consultants steer people to Androids and LTE it's hardly surprising that LTE Androids sell like crazy with non-LTE Androids next, then iPhones then RIM then WP7.

No argument, its faster. Just personally, that alone isnt a big enough selling point and its just used as hype to get people to buy devices, which you seem to be confirming. Its a major selling point because people are told it is, doesnt seem to be a compelling reason technically. Just going with the faster is better ideology.

 

[naplesbill]

No argument, its faster. Just personally, that alone isnt a big enough selling point and its just used as hype to get people to buy devices, which you seem to be confirming. Its a major selling point because people are told it is, doesnt seem to be a compelling reason technically. Just going with the faster is better ideology.

This is so true. Marketing at it's finest. The majority of people wouldn't even be able to tell the difference when you consider how the typical smartphone is used.

 

[palandri]

...Higher frequencies have less indoor penetration....

Not many people know that, were you in the Navy? I was in the Coast Guard and I know you communicate with Subs using ELF (Extremely Low Frequency)

 

[naplesbill]

Not many people know that, were you in the Navy? I was in the Coast Guard and I know you communicate with Subs using ELF (Extremely Low Frequency)

Well, I was not in the military but I do have two older brothers who were in the Air Force. Oddly, one now works for Sirius and the other works for Ericcson. They both have expertise in wireless technologies.

What I know about wireless signals is based on the research I performed (8 years ago) when looking for the best wireless carrier in this area.

 

[Reflexx]

I expect next year to be big for Windows Phone. Because of the release of Windows 8, Nokia devices, and the possible introduction of Windows Phone 8.

If Nokia makes as big a marketing push here as they are in Europe, and we see some pretty nice minimum specs with WP8, I wonder how much MS really will NEED Verizon.

The iPhone made it without Verizon. I think Windows Phone could too.

If Verizon says, "no" to Windows Phone. I think it's their loss. LTE will eventually come. And they'll end up coming back.

 

[CHIP72]

Honestly, if Verizon were being just and fair (which they will never be), they should give the same ultimatum to Apple with the iPhone.

This is typical Verizon arrogance, and a big part of the reason they didn't get the iPhone in the first place.

The reason why Verizon didn't get the iPhone in the first place is 1) Verizon is very focused on improving its infrastructure and not so focused on getting the latest and greatest devices (which is why Verizon often lagged in getting the latest and greatest devices until the widespread 4G LTE deployment became an irresistable carrot for many smartphone manufacturers to show off their high-end devices) and 2) AT&T IS focused on getting the latest and greatest but not so focused on improving their infrastructure. Not coincidentally, Verizon tends to get high marks from consumers while AT&T gets low marks, due to how each carrier improves (or doesn't improve) its infrastructure.

As for the iPhone/Windows Phone comparison, it would be dumb for any carrier to ignore the iPhone's popularity and market share. By contrast, Windows Phone's market share is small enough right now that Verizon can deliver ultimatums. Also, with the iPhone it wouldn't be in Apple's best interest to have the same device on 3 different carriers where one of the carrier's devices was so superior to the other 2 carriers that no one would buy the device from the other 2 carriers. (This isn't the reason why Apple didn't have 4G in the 4S, but even if they had 4G LTE ready they may have passed on it not to undermine AT&T and Sprint.)

 

[scottcraft]

I'm hoping Verizon gets an lte windows phone before my next upgrade. LTE is supposed to be in my area in June or July, so my next phone will be LTE capable.

Sent from my Windows 7 phone using Board Express

 

[naplesbill]

The reason why Verizon didn't get the iPhone in the first place is 1) Verizon is very focused on improving its infrastructure and not so focused on getting the latest and greatest devices (which is why Verizon often lagged in getting the latest and greatest devices until the widespread 4G LTE deployment became an irresistable carrot for many smartphone manufacturers to show off their high-end devices) and 2) AT&T IS focused on getting the latest and greatest but not so focused on improving their infrastructure. Not coincidentally, Verizon tends to get high marks from consumers while AT&T gets low marks, due to how each carrier improves (or doesn't improve) its infrastructure.

As for the iPhone/Windows Phone comparison, it would be dumb for any carrier to ignore the iPhone's popularity and market share. By contrast, Windows Phone's market share is small enough right now that Verizon can deliver ultimatums. Also, with the iPhone it wouldn't be in Apple's best interest to have the same device on 3 different carriers where one of the carrier's devices was so superior to the other 2 carriers that no one would buy the device from the other 2 carriers. (This isn't the reason why Apple didn't have 4G in the 4S, but even if they had 4G LTE ready they may have passed on it not to undermine AT&T and Sprint.)

Here is the real reason straight from the horses mouth:

"From a customer perspective we didn't like the restricted distribution. We didn't like the fact that we were being asked not to service customers. Let's just assume the model you see from AT&T is what they asked us to do, so I'm not divulging anything," he said. "We have a huge network of stores and we put a lot of investment into training our people. The model was to say to a customer 'thanks for coming in, now go down the street to Apple and they'll take care of you.' We didn't like the customer model."

He further elaborated by saying that Verizon also didn't like the financial terms that Apple put forth. "The financial model, if you assume the financials that the European countries have said publicly what theirs was, we've made a $40 billion investment in our network in the last eight years," he said. "I don't think that revenue split was commensurate with the investment we made in the network. We are very happy with that decision."



Read more: Did Verizon's McAdam change his tune on why Verizon didn't get the iPhone in 2007? - FierceWireless Did Verizon's McAdam change his tune on why Verizon didn't get the iPhone in 2007? - FierceWireless
Subscribe: Wireless News, Wireless Newsletter - FierceWireless

This was definitely arrogance, and from the sound of it, they didn't like not being able to put their crapware and logo on the device.

 

[joemd60]

LTE is already in my area, but not of importance to me. I find my 3G speeds plenty fast, and when I am home I am on WIFI.
I have unlimited data, but LTE speeds won't matter when Verizon starts throttling the speeds of the data hogs.
Unfortunately, you play by Verizon's rules or it's the highway. And they have the network to back up if you want to call it, their arrogance.
And for some like me, Verizon is my only option. So all we can do is cross our fingers and hope Microsoft is still in the game.
I am very happy with my Windows phone, but my world won't come to an end if I have to venture elsewhere. At the end of the day it is still just a cell phone.

 

[scottcraft]

Here is the real reason straight from the horses mouth:



This was definitely arrogance, and from the sound of it, they didn't like not being able to put their crapware and logo on the device.

I certainly don't know the financial details of the agreement between Verizon and Apple, but to me it looks like Verizon and AT&T treat the iphone the same. If you have a problem with your Verizon iphone you have to deal with Apple. The only thing Verizon will do is determine if the phone is defective and send you a refurbished phone if it will be a warranty replacement or have you file an insurance claim if it's a damaged phone. I'm sure Verizon had more bargaining power with Apple in 2010 than they did in 2007 due to the strength of their android sales, but I would like to know how much they had to make in the way of concessions. Either way I think Verizon carrying the iphone is a win for both companies.

 

[canesfan625]

And that's the case with every carrier. Higher speeds are better since the max will never be reached once multiple people start hitting the tower. So would you want to share a tower with a "zillion" people at a max speed of 7Mbps or a tower with a "zillion" people with a max speed of 40Mbps.

I'd rather be on the 40Mbps connection that gets slowed down to 12Mbps once everyone starts hitting the tower over the 7Mbps connection that gets slowed down to 200kbps once everyone starts hitting it.

As of this year VZW averaged around 6mbps down on laptop modems and 1 down on phones. they have actually done a 180 since last year in speed and that's before being inundated with 4g phones. Speeds will be irrelevant until they do something about battery life anyway. I bet most will keep it on 3g until they need 4g