Even If verizon were to have sold it, People would have not bought it
from verizon. There not going to give up the money from all the bend me
over and pay up the butt for our apps.

I don't like apple so I would never buy one. But if verizon were to get
there hands on it, They would have messed it up royal. And with 90% of
it under Verizon's control it would have sucked more then it will.

Without being able to replace the battery is the biggest neg I see so
far. I wonder if it's going to to run windows mobile under boot camp ?


John Navas wrote:
> On Mon, 29 Jan 2007 20:57:35 -0800, SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com>
> wrote in <45bed047$0$69038$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net>:
>
>> Scott wrote:
>>> John Navas <spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote in
>>> news:t3etr2187g0fm8jgajl9tnfo48bbbvf1m0@4ax.com:
>>>
>>>> Yeah, right. Can you say, "Sour grapes?"
>>> Yeah, right. Can you say, "blinded by ignorance?"
>> Whether or not Verizon made the right decision in no acceding to Apple's
>> demands remains to be seen. The key question is how many new subscribers
>> the iPhone brings to Cingular, that would have gone elsewhere if not for
>> the iPhone. Verizon is doing so much better than Cingular right now in
>> terms of new post-paid subscribers, that maybe they just decided that
>> they didn't have to give away the store to Apple.
>>
>> It is very interesting that Apple first tried to do a deal with Verizon.
>> Clearly they saw the value of partnering with the carrier that has the
>> best network in the U.S..
>
> "First" is another of your inventions -- the actual story (rumor)
> <http://www.usatoday.com/tech/news/2007-01-28-verizon-iphone_x.htm>
> just says Verizon turned Apple down. If true (there is no independent
> corroboration), that might well mean that Apple approached _both_
> Cingular and Verizon (hint: that's a common practice, called a "bidding
> war"); Cingular won the bidding; and Verizon is now trying to put a good
> face on losing and the likely adverse impact on its market share.
>