Full of Win
Mar 28, 06:39 PM
Respectfully, I think you're missing the point. In its totality, installing an app is more like:
1) Google or otherwise search for an app. Make sure its the Mac version, compatible with your OS version, processor, etc. There probably won't be any reviews, more like select quotes from people who liked it.
2) IF you trust that website, fill out your credit card information, PayPal account, etc.
3) Download it and do the process you described for installing.
4) If you need to re-install the app, buy a new computer, etc. hope that the company allows you to re-download it.
5) If you have a good/bad experience, good luck reviewing it or rating it.
I'm a pretty tech-savvy guy and I still appreciate the ease of the Mac App Store.
Yet, inexplicably, we made due without a walled garden for decades.
1) Wow, you will have to do some research. There might even be some reading involved. Also, since OS 10.6.6 + is the only OS that will run the store, its pretty easy to ensure compatibility.
2) Most apps I use are free (not stolen), so payment does not factor in unless I doneate via PayPal. Also, since Apple is taking a pretty large slice of the revenue, at some point this will have to be passed on to the consumers
3) A file on a thumb drive is easier to pass along than download a file from the internet via the Mac App store.
4) Or you could store the file on your hard drive or a NAS, or a cheap external drive. Noting says you have to re-download it.
5) So I guess that sites like MacUpdate are not useful? There are plenty of review sites for OS X apps.
Its not a bad concept - if its voluntary. However, to make it a rule to compete in the Design Award is lame. As others have said, it should be renamed the MacStore App Award to reflect the narrowing of the field they are doing by only allowing App Store devs to compete.
1) Google or otherwise search for an app. Make sure its the Mac version, compatible with your OS version, processor, etc. There probably won't be any reviews, more like select quotes from people who liked it.
2) IF you trust that website, fill out your credit card information, PayPal account, etc.
3) Download it and do the process you described for installing.
4) If you need to re-install the app, buy a new computer, etc. hope that the company allows you to re-download it.
5) If you have a good/bad experience, good luck reviewing it or rating it.
I'm a pretty tech-savvy guy and I still appreciate the ease of the Mac App Store.
Yet, inexplicably, we made due without a walled garden for decades.
1) Wow, you will have to do some research. There might even be some reading involved. Also, since OS 10.6.6 + is the only OS that will run the store, its pretty easy to ensure compatibility.
2) Most apps I use are free (not stolen), so payment does not factor in unless I doneate via PayPal. Also, since Apple is taking a pretty large slice of the revenue, at some point this will have to be passed on to the consumers
3) A file on a thumb drive is easier to pass along than download a file from the internet via the Mac App store.
4) Or you could store the file on your hard drive or a NAS, or a cheap external drive. Noting says you have to re-download it.
5) So I guess that sites like MacUpdate are not useful? There are plenty of review sites for OS X apps.
Its not a bad concept - if its voluntary. However, to make it a rule to compete in the Design Award is lame. As others have said, it should be renamed the MacStore App Award to reflect the narrowing of the field they are doing by only allowing App Store devs to compete.
DotComName
May 3, 02:40 PM
Tethering should NOT cost extra! What do the carriers have to do with the data after they send it to my phone??! Why can't we just pay for the same data we already do and have our phone use and manipulate it anyway we want! I always thought it was ******** and I will never pay for it! Makes no sense!
AppliedVisual
Oct 17, 11:01 AM
HD DVD for movies and Blu-Ray for data. Problem solved.
Um, no....
At 30GB max on HD-DVD, even with a good VC1 transfer, 3 hour and longer features must start sacrificing quality to fit. In other words, films like "Titanic" are going to run into the same shortcomings on HD-DVD as they did with DVD.
There's other reasons to choose BluRay and this whole format war would be compltely non-existant had Sony released their product nearly a year ago when they first promised and if it had actually worked. Now they keep fumbling the ball and losing out to an inferior format at every turn.
In the end, we'll see universal players as a solution, but I doubt HD-DVD vs. BluRay will be solved before the next big format comes along. All the pieces are in place to manufacture a universal player, but Sony's Blu-Ray licensing agreements specifically forbid the inclusion of support for HD-DVD, DVD-Audio and other competing formats on the same device. It's questionable whether or not this is legal, Sony and Philips tried it with DVD+R and the exclusive licensing failed. It will only be a matter of time before someone challenges the Sony licensing. Unfortunately, the few companies already in the best position to produce a universal player (Samsung, Panasoic, LG, etc...) are already Blu-Ray allies. So it may take a bit more time.
Personally, I would rather just have digital downloads from a high speed download service and store them on my own storage whether it is on DVDs, Blu-Ray, HD-DVD as data. For large downloads, I would like to go to a local video store and download them to my laptop using Firewire 800/400 or USB but that is probably too far in the future.
Direct downloads would definitely be welcome, as long as there is the option to write them to some form of tangible media like an optical disc. There's also the issue of download times and quality. A top-notch VC1 transfer on HD-DVD or BluRay at 1080p is going to occupy 25+ GB of space. That's a significant download for any conventional broadband connection. VC1 or H.264 versions of films at near-DVD quality like we'll find in the iTunes store are OK compared to DVD and are a good start, but I think we're still just a couple years away from it really happening with HD on a broad scale. The infrastructure is being constructed now, products like iTV, iPod and yes even the Zune, will pave the way for this to happen. So we're on our way...
I think ultimately what will happen is films/videos will become entirely on-demand. Users will be able to connect directly to major studios and have on-demand access to their entire catalog of every film ever created. Sites like iTunes will still serve a purpose as a portal or gateway to access multiple catalogs from different studios all in one place with a common interface. Probably still several years off and broadband and widespread wireless access methods need to be enhanced a bit, but this is no doubt where we're headed.
Um, no....
At 30GB max on HD-DVD, even with a good VC1 transfer, 3 hour and longer features must start sacrificing quality to fit. In other words, films like "Titanic" are going to run into the same shortcomings on HD-DVD as they did with DVD.
There's other reasons to choose BluRay and this whole format war would be compltely non-existant had Sony released their product nearly a year ago when they first promised and if it had actually worked. Now they keep fumbling the ball and losing out to an inferior format at every turn.
In the end, we'll see universal players as a solution, but I doubt HD-DVD vs. BluRay will be solved before the next big format comes along. All the pieces are in place to manufacture a universal player, but Sony's Blu-Ray licensing agreements specifically forbid the inclusion of support for HD-DVD, DVD-Audio and other competing formats on the same device. It's questionable whether or not this is legal, Sony and Philips tried it with DVD+R and the exclusive licensing failed. It will only be a matter of time before someone challenges the Sony licensing. Unfortunately, the few companies already in the best position to produce a universal player (Samsung, Panasoic, LG, etc...) are already Blu-Ray allies. So it may take a bit more time.
Personally, I would rather just have digital downloads from a high speed download service and store them on my own storage whether it is on DVDs, Blu-Ray, HD-DVD as data. For large downloads, I would like to go to a local video store and download them to my laptop using Firewire 800/400 or USB but that is probably too far in the future.
Direct downloads would definitely be welcome, as long as there is the option to write them to some form of tangible media like an optical disc. There's also the issue of download times and quality. A top-notch VC1 transfer on HD-DVD or BluRay at 1080p is going to occupy 25+ GB of space. That's a significant download for any conventional broadband connection. VC1 or H.264 versions of films at near-DVD quality like we'll find in the iTunes store are OK compared to DVD and are a good start, but I think we're still just a couple years away from it really happening with HD on a broad scale. The infrastructure is being constructed now, products like iTV, iPod and yes even the Zune, will pave the way for this to happen. So we're on our way...
I think ultimately what will happen is films/videos will become entirely on-demand. Users will be able to connect directly to major studios and have on-demand access to their entire catalog of every film ever created. Sites like iTunes will still serve a purpose as a portal or gateway to access multiple catalogs from different studios all in one place with a common interface. Probably still several years off and broadband and widespread wireless access methods need to be enhanced a bit, but this is no doubt where we're headed.
raleigh1208
Nov 24, 11:23 PM
Quoting from the Apple website:
"Shopping event is available only at the online Apple Store on November 24, from 12:01 a.m. to 11:59 p.m. PST and at Apple retail stores."
So sale continues for a few more hours.
"Shopping event is available only at the online Apple Store on November 24, from 12:01 a.m. to 11:59 p.m. PST and at Apple retail stores."
So sale continues for a few more hours.
Aniej
Jan 5, 02:44 PM
it would be great if apple would put up a video feed of the keynote live.
if not that, put it in the local apple stores.
wildcowboy and I will go post on the apple site suggesting this idea, perhaps steve will then follow our idea 9 minutes latter and ubermac can thank him for it;)
if not that, put it in the local apple stores.
wildcowboy and I will go post on the apple site suggesting this idea, perhaps steve will then follow our idea 9 minutes latter and ubermac can thank him for it;)
Bregalad
Apr 16, 04:23 PM
I don't see how they would go back to angles after touting the more curved and comfortable 3G / 3GS back. There was a big focus on how much more comfortable the new iPhone was to hold compared to the first.
The iPod touch is a different beast. The second generation has a nicer feel around the screen, but the smooth rounded back makes it harder to hold. Fortunately there are some really good cases out there to rectify the situation.
The iPod touch is a different beast. The second generation has a nicer feel around the screen, but the smooth rounded back makes it harder to hold. Fortunately there are some really good cases out there to rectify the situation.
Dagless
Mar 26, 06:16 PM
Well, they did steal over $1000 worth of stuff. Thats a big deal in my book when I only make $10,000 a year and that I'm in college. I know what you are saying but its still crappy for someone to even steal $100 worth of stuff from you.
It's crappy that someone would steal anything from you. The feeling of having something taken from you is an unmeasurable price in itself.
Back in our old house we had a bike stolen, my grandfather (who was about 70 at the time) fought off some Spanish muggers whilst on holiday too. That really shook him up and nothing was taken from him!
It's crappy that someone would steal anything from you. The feeling of having something taken from you is an unmeasurable price in itself.
Back in our old house we had a bike stolen, my grandfather (who was about 70 at the time) fought off some Spanish muggers whilst on holiday too. That really shook him up and nothing was taken from him!
AhmedFaisal
Apr 13, 11:15 AM
Great, a shoot out on a plane loaded with innocent bystanders. :rolleyes:
I'd take that 1 in a billion risk (especially since they have non piercing projectiles) over being heckled and manhandled by TSA any day. And that way I have at least a chance to stay alive if a hijacker makes through security, which they will eventually do even with current "security standards". International travel security was sufficient before 9/11. All they needed to do was raise US domestic security to that level and add sky marshals to ALL not just some flights. Problem solved. Again, 9/11 were domestic flights, NOT international. There was a security problem with DOMESTIC travel in the US, NOT international. You can roll your eyes until they pop out, doesn't change the fact that you are being fooled by the fearmongering of governments ever since 9/11 so they can piece by piece whittle away your rights to privacy and not having to risk your health for stuff like business travel.
I'd take that 1 in a billion risk (especially since they have non piercing projectiles) over being heckled and manhandled by TSA any day. And that way I have at least a chance to stay alive if a hijacker makes through security, which they will eventually do even with current "security standards". International travel security was sufficient before 9/11. All they needed to do was raise US domestic security to that level and add sky marshals to ALL not just some flights. Problem solved. Again, 9/11 were domestic flights, NOT international. There was a security problem with DOMESTIC travel in the US, NOT international. You can roll your eyes until they pop out, doesn't change the fact that you are being fooled by the fearmongering of governments ever since 9/11 so they can piece by piece whittle away your rights to privacy and not having to risk your health for stuff like business travel.
arn
Oct 10, 06:43 PM
moved to page 1, not because I necessarily think it was accurate, but because it's gotten wide exposure already and also that while Engadget generally has very low-standards for publishing rumors, this time they are claiming it's reliable...
we'll see...
arn
we'll see...
arn
ndheah
Jan 15, 01:36 PM
Way, way, way too much money for what you get. I was hoping they would release a simple, thinner laptop that was going to be cheap and finally compete with Dell/Gateway/HP
chrmjenkins
Apr 25, 12:06 PM
Resizing only means having to rewrite apps if the screen resolution changes -- especially if it changes by something other than a whole-number multiple (e.g. 1.5x versus 2x). All rumors indicate a 3.7-inch screen iPhone would have the same Retina-Display resolution (still maintaining over 300dpi).
Technically their "Retina-Display" stuff is based also on typical viewing distance as well -- so a "Retina Display" iPad, iMac, or MacBook (assuming those are in the works) may not go as high as 300dpi. However, a Retina-Display iPad would like require the same pixel-doubling (2x) that was done for apps not optimized for the Retina Display until updates came that included higher-resolution graphics.
From a realistic standpoint too, I think that increasing the size to 3.7" or even 4.0" isn't going to make a difference because few users would be able to tolerate closer than 1' for extended periods.
Technically their "Retina-Display" stuff is based also on typical viewing distance as well -- so a "Retina Display" iPad, iMac, or MacBook (assuming those are in the works) may not go as high as 300dpi. However, a Retina-Display iPad would like require the same pixel-doubling (2x) that was done for apps not optimized for the Retina Display until updates came that included higher-resolution graphics.
From a realistic standpoint too, I think that increasing the size to 3.7" or even 4.0" isn't going to make a difference because few users would be able to tolerate closer than 1' for extended periods.
skunk
Apr 21, 12:12 PM
Exactly.Very inexactly. The Arabs invented 0 some time ago. The system is borked.
obeygiant
Apr 15, 02:41 PM
People who have made history have just been people and gay or straight have never come into it. What does it matter? A stand alone class in college on "gay studies" I would have no problem with. The requirement in public schools to teach gay history is bit absurd.
Those who are gay and feel as if they've been wronged, I feel for them and effort to make it right, but the level of suffering by gay is nothing compared to what black people or women have endured over the centuries. It bothers me a little when gay suffrage is pitted against something like slavery. Just not the same, IMO.
Those who are gay and feel as if they've been wronged, I feel for them and effort to make it right, but the level of suffering by gay is nothing compared to what black people or women have endured over the centuries. It bothers me a little when gay suffrage is pitted against something like slavery. Just not the same, IMO.
Bonte
Oct 29, 02:24 PM
They will take "because it'll kill Apple's hardware business, which is where Apple makes most of their money" as an answer, however.
Apple's interests lie in selling high-margin solutions, not bottom-of-the-market extremely low margin PCs.
Think of Dell as Ford, and Apple as BMW.
The computer - car analogy has to stop, it makes no sense at all. The most reliable car is the Toyota Corolla because it is the longest in production and has the errors worked out a long time ago, worst reliable cars are short production but expensive models like the Ferrari. Ford has less luxury options but may well be more reliable than BMW, price and luxury isn't the key factor here.
As for the "high-margin solutions" Apple has a good position at the moment, price is competitive and high standard. It looks like Apple wants to keep a firm grip on the top end models but losing it on the low end, there is no sub $500 Mac! (except maybe the "iTV") Licensing an OS has a typical $80 price point and that is more than they make on a Mac Mini (hard- and software together) so it makes sense to me.
A few years back Steve said that Apple would focus more on software than on hardware (and brought the iPod on the market :) ), the release of 10.5 may well be the turning point for the OS. If Mac sales go the way of the iPod then i agree there is no need to license but if not i see no other option. Its not if but when.
Apple's interests lie in selling high-margin solutions, not bottom-of-the-market extremely low margin PCs.
Think of Dell as Ford, and Apple as BMW.
The computer - car analogy has to stop, it makes no sense at all. The most reliable car is the Toyota Corolla because it is the longest in production and has the errors worked out a long time ago, worst reliable cars are short production but expensive models like the Ferrari. Ford has less luxury options but may well be more reliable than BMW, price and luxury isn't the key factor here.
As for the "high-margin solutions" Apple has a good position at the moment, price is competitive and high standard. It looks like Apple wants to keep a firm grip on the top end models but losing it on the low end, there is no sub $500 Mac! (except maybe the "iTV") Licensing an OS has a typical $80 price point and that is more than they make on a Mac Mini (hard- and software together) so it makes sense to me.
A few years back Steve said that Apple would focus more on software than on hardware (and brought the iPod on the market :) ), the release of 10.5 may well be the turning point for the OS. If Mac sales go the way of the iPod then i agree there is no need to license but if not i see no other option. Its not if but when.
Burgess07
Apr 29, 03:53 PM
1. Dang, I liked the sliders. Wish Apple would set an option in the system preferences to enable/disable them.
2. Scrollbars still disappear for me.
2. Scrollbars still disappear for me.
dicklacara
Jul 21, 01:25 PM
But Apple admitted that it DOES drop more calls than 3GS.
They spun it as "less than 1 per 100", but assuming all 3,000,000 iPhone 4 users make about 5 calls per day, that's over ONE MILLION dropped calls per week MORE than iPhone 3GS.
It's a problem.
It's been reproduced by CNET, Consumer Reports, NYT, and many others.
The debate here is not whether there's a problem, but why Apple is obfuscating, rather than fixing it, pretending that bridging the gap of their electrically exposed antenna is equivalent to attenuating an antenna by completely covering it with one's meaty hand.
(seems like moving this gap to the bottom edge of the phone where it's far less likely to be touched, would be an easy fix).
Couple of things:
1) What isn't factored into your calculations is that because of its more-sensitive antenna, the iP4 was able to make calls, in marginal signal areas, where the 3GS showed no signal and was not able to attempt or receive a call... dropping any of these "never-before-possible" calls would reflect poorly on the iP4, and be included in the "< 1 call per hundred" more dropped calls by the iP4.
2) <1 per 100 more dropped calls by the iP4 than the 3GS. "< 1" can mean anything from, say, .0000000001 to .9999999999. Without knowing the real delta fraction it is difficult to base calculations on it.
3) The 3GS came into being with a plethora of available cases-- the iP4 with 1 case, that was in so short supply as to be non-available. Apple stated that 80% of the 3GSs left their store with a case. So, many 3Gs had 2 layers of antenna shielding, the 3GS plastic housing and an external case. The bulk of iP4s had neither-- 0 levels of antenna shielding.
All of this has been widely reported (or obvious) to those who care to objectively examine the facts. So it is a bit disingenuous to make your assertions, without qualification.
.
They spun it as "less than 1 per 100", but assuming all 3,000,000 iPhone 4 users make about 5 calls per day, that's over ONE MILLION dropped calls per week MORE than iPhone 3GS.
It's a problem.
It's been reproduced by CNET, Consumer Reports, NYT, and many others.
The debate here is not whether there's a problem, but why Apple is obfuscating, rather than fixing it, pretending that bridging the gap of their electrically exposed antenna is equivalent to attenuating an antenna by completely covering it with one's meaty hand.
(seems like moving this gap to the bottom edge of the phone where it's far less likely to be touched, would be an easy fix).
Couple of things:
1) What isn't factored into your calculations is that because of its more-sensitive antenna, the iP4 was able to make calls, in marginal signal areas, where the 3GS showed no signal and was not able to attempt or receive a call... dropping any of these "never-before-possible" calls would reflect poorly on the iP4, and be included in the "< 1 call per hundred" more dropped calls by the iP4.
2) <1 per 100 more dropped calls by the iP4 than the 3GS. "< 1" can mean anything from, say, .0000000001 to .9999999999. Without knowing the real delta fraction it is difficult to base calculations on it.
3) The 3GS came into being with a plethora of available cases-- the iP4 with 1 case, that was in so short supply as to be non-available. Apple stated that 80% of the 3GSs left their store with a case. So, many 3Gs had 2 layers of antenna shielding, the 3GS plastic housing and an external case. The bulk of iP4s had neither-- 0 levels of antenna shielding.
All of this has been widely reported (or obvious) to those who care to objectively examine the facts. So it is a bit disingenuous to make your assertions, without qualification.
.
superfula
Apr 29, 05:09 PM
You're mixing up your kernels. NT 4.0 doesn't share a kernel with 95/98, NT 3.51 doesn't share a kernel with Windows 3.x...
Windows 7 is Windows 7 because it's the 7th release of Windows NT.
1- Windows NT 3.1
2- Windows NT 3.5
3- Windows NT 4.0
4- Windows 2000
5- Windows XP
6- Windows Vista
7- Windows 7
That's the only way it makes sense.
No, smitty was correct. MS uses version numbers that identify it's code. It's how software devs can write code that decides whether the app should be allowed to install.
In a command prompt, use winver. Note the version listed
EG, Windows 95, NT 4, 98, and ME are all considered Windows 4.x. 2000 and XP are both 5.x, Vista and Windows 7 are 6.x. So it's clear 7 is nothing more than marketing.
From the horses mouth: http://windowsteamblog.com/windows/archive/b/windowsvista/archive/2008/10/14/why-7.aspx
Windows 7 is Windows 7 because it's the 7th release of Windows NT.
1- Windows NT 3.1
2- Windows NT 3.5
3- Windows NT 4.0
4- Windows 2000
5- Windows XP
6- Windows Vista
7- Windows 7
That's the only way it makes sense.
No, smitty was correct. MS uses version numbers that identify it's code. It's how software devs can write code that decides whether the app should be allowed to install.
In a command prompt, use winver. Note the version listed
EG, Windows 95, NT 4, 98, and ME are all considered Windows 4.x. 2000 and XP are both 5.x, Vista and Windows 7 are 6.x. So it's clear 7 is nothing more than marketing.
From the horses mouth: http://windowsteamblog.com/windows/archive/b/windowsvista/archive/2008/10/14/why-7.aspx
Young Spade
May 4, 11:22 AM
+1 - correct. it should not matter but since the fear is there will be no bandwidth left after the geeks have their way, they support moves like this.
Well yea... I mean but they ultimately want the money from users. What is it, 20-25 bucks? I'm assuming there are at least 100,000 tetherers. I mean... that's lowballing it by a huge margin, but that's already 2-2.5 million right there on TOP of the data bill we HAVE to have for owning a smartphone. They know what they're doing.
Well yea... I mean but they ultimately want the money from users. What is it, 20-25 bucks? I'm assuming there are at least 100,000 tetherers. I mean... that's lowballing it by a huge margin, but that's already 2-2.5 million right there on TOP of the data bill we HAVE to have for owning a smartphone. They know what they're doing.
fredoviola
May 4, 09:46 AM
A child's imagination is the magic thing, not the 500 dollar computer that dulls the child's truly magic thoughts. I wish Apple would stick to humorous ads. These pieces done with "moving" bits of piano music make me a bit sick.
longofest
Oct 10, 05:22 PM
6g?
Nope... we're thinking this will be a totally different iPod product, separate from the normal iPod or the nano or the shuffle.
Nope... we're thinking this will be a totally different iPod product, separate from the normal iPod or the nano or the shuffle.
xraytech
May 4, 10:54 AM
A great commercial. As a teacher who is getting 30 ipads for next years students I am super pumped. These truly are the future of education and I can't wait to have my students start using them.
Wow!!!
I've heard stories but DAYUM!!!
Do you teach at a public, charter or private school. And what grade?
Wow!!!
I've heard stories but DAYUM!!!
Do you teach at a public, charter or private school. And what grade?
rtdgoldfish
Mar 29, 01:13 AM
Too bad you cannot scare the snot out of the kid, on camera.
Shows up with camera crew...
"Microsoft Prize patrol, do you have an XBox 360? Can you show it to me"
Types stuff into handheld...
"Do you own this machine?"
Types stuff into handheld...
"Oh, sorry ... you cannot collect a prize with this XBox 360 -- the serial number has it listed as a murder weapon, and the owner is a likely suspect."
I like it. Think I'll try it tomorrow. :-)
Shows up with camera crew...
"Microsoft Prize patrol, do you have an XBox 360? Can you show it to me"
Types stuff into handheld...
"Do you own this machine?"
Types stuff into handheld...
"Oh, sorry ... you cannot collect a prize with this XBox 360 -- the serial number has it listed as a murder weapon, and the owner is a likely suspect."
I like it. Think I'll try it tomorrow. :-)
OllyW
Mar 9, 07:23 AM
Apple makes what?
Loads and loads of money. ;)
Loads and loads of money. ;)
Dmac77
Oct 6, 03:21 PM
I honestly don't understand why people are always complaining about AT&T. I and no one else that I know has ever had an issue with AT&T in our area (Ann Arbor, MI). But everyone who has Verizon has issues.
We used to be on Verizon, and we would always get dropped calls. And my friends who are still on Verizon still drop calls all the time.
It's the same if I drive out into the middle of nowhere. (Which me as some friends did recently). I had 3G coverage in the middle of nowhere, but my friend on Verizon had no coverage at all.
And the funny thing is that according to the maps, Verizon is supposed to have better 3G coverage in my area which is total BS.
EDIT: I also forgot to mention the crappy customer service from Verizon. Like the manager at a Verizon store telling my mom to ****** off and die, because she was pissed that there had been a service outage for over a week.
AT&T will bend over backwards for us though. The one time we had a problem (a day long outage) they prorated 25% of our bill for that month, without us even asking.
Don
We used to be on Verizon, and we would always get dropped calls. And my friends who are still on Verizon still drop calls all the time.
It's the same if I drive out into the middle of nowhere. (Which me as some friends did recently). I had 3G coverage in the middle of nowhere, but my friend on Verizon had no coverage at all.
And the funny thing is that according to the maps, Verizon is supposed to have better 3G coverage in my area which is total BS.
EDIT: I also forgot to mention the crappy customer service from Verizon. Like the manager at a Verizon store telling my mom to ****** off and die, because she was pissed that there had been a service outage for over a week.
AT&T will bend over backwards for us though. The one time we had a problem (a day long outage) they prorated 25% of our bill for that month, without us even asking.
Don
No comments:
Post a Comment