Tinman wrote:
> Carl wrote:
>> "Tinman" wrote:
>>>
>>> I used Sprint for years--still have three phones with them--and
>>> never once did I consider switching due to "the network." Indeed
>>> after hesitantly switching to AT&T for my main phone this past
>>> summer I have been very impressed with AT&T's coverage--no problem
>>> for me whatsoever. Oh yea, I switched to AT&T solely due to the
>>> iPhone. Verizon blew it
>>> on that one big-time.
>>>
>>>
>> Here's the 2007 JD Power review of all cell phone providers. Sprint
>> scored the lowest in all rated areas and in all sections of the
>> country. Guess who scored highest (though granted with not 100%
>> consistency)?
>
> I wrote about network coverage gaps and you came back about customer
> service? How would Verizon's customer service have helped me in an
> area that has no--again, no--Verizon coverage? <shakes head>
>
>
>>
>> I don't get you guys. I have seen mention in at least one recent
>> magazine article (sorry, I can't cite; don't recall for sure) of
>> Sprint being the one service provider to avoid. I have seen talk in
>> other newsgroups of Sprint possibly going out of business and
>> possibly being absorbed by Verizon. None of what I've read speaks
>> well for Sprint. So you guys can cite your own
>> one-man-in-one-mysterious-spot experiences and feel better about
>> yourselves I suppose, but the facts don't support you.
>
> Enough with the drama queen crap. SMS brought up a really remote area
> that he claimed had only Verizon coverage. You said nothing. Others
> brought up true-life experiences with Sprint, covering a much larger
> area, and you whine? Grow up already, no one insulted one of your
> family--it's cellphone carrier, that's all.
>
> Again: I have had no problems with Sprint, for more than seven years
> now, as far as coverage, phone selection, call quality, and pricing
> are concerned. Yes customer service sucks but that doesn't make the
> other carriers "great." They just happen to suck less in an industry
> that sucks a lot. But you know what? I don't call customer service
> very often, so it doesn't effect me much--certainly not enough to pay
> more money for it.
> I've now had AT&T for nearly six months with no problems either.
> Since I have had no problems with either Sprint or AT&T I fail to see
> why I should be impressed with Verizon when they have zero coverage
> in at least one area that I am in all of the time, and they passed up
> the only phone that could have possibly gotten me to switch.
>
You too failed to read the other three citations I gave you. You're picking
and choosing the semantics which suit your argument. Read all of them and
more detail will emerge. It's not me that has to grow up. You're the one
adamantly defending a carrier on the verge of going out of business and
which does have the worst rep for call reliability, whether you want to
accept that or not, and you're on this thread justifying your decision
because why, if I'm the "drama queen"? Perhaps the reason Verizon users are
not jumping in talking about where their coverage was better than the other
carriers is BECAUSE THE LIST WOULD BE TOO LONG! :-)

By the way, while I'm just as disappointed as you that Verizon passed up the
iPhone opportunity, I have to say that if Verizon were an individual person
we would be complimenting their moral character, not criticizing them. Apple
trying to make a deal which cuts into the service provider's revenues is a
bit self-serving and arrogant, I think. Verizon telling them to f___ off is
sort of ballsy, dontcha think?

And last, I might ask you why you think Apple approached Verizon first? It
couldn't be because Sprint was the better choice for them but they wanted to
start at the bottom, could it? :-)