Go Back   Wireless and Wifi Forums > Cellular Communications > US Networks > alt.cellular.attws
Register FAQ Forum Rules Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Advertise Mark Forums Read

 
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #61 (permalink)  
Old 01-28-2010, 07:02 PM
News
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: NEWS: Apple iPad and AT&T pricing, etc.

Michelle Steiner wrote:
> In article <pMednfAYfZCn4vzWnZ2dnUVZ_r9i4p2d@speakeasy.net> ,
> News <News@Groups.Name> wrote:
>
>>> Don't tell me that you hate Jews too, just like Larry.
>>>

>>
>> Can't speak for Larry.

>
> Oh, Larry has already admitted that he hates Jews.
>



Oh? But Larry likes waffles, too.

Reply With Quote
  #62 (permalink)  
Old 01-28-2010, 07:05 PM
Your Name
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: NEWS: Apple iPad and AT&T pricing, etc.


"iPad 3G another AT&T exclusive!" <vic.healey@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:dc4c0da2-2a14-472b-bf64-aae93e27b65d@f12g2000yqn.googlegroups.com...
>
> I expect additional versions of the iPad/iPhone in a May/June time
> frame that will add even more capabilities including making it a full
> blown iPhone.


New iPhones are quite likely in June / July 2010, but there won't be new
iPads until at least next year - it doesn't even get released until April
and May, so Apple definitely won't be updating it only a month later. iPods
and iPhones are on a 12 month schedule while most of the Mac computers are
on a 6-month-speedbum and 12-month-update schedule ... or at least as close
to a schedule as Apple gets.




Reply With Quote
  #63 (permalink)  
Old 01-28-2010, 07:09 PM
Your Name
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: NEWS: Apple iPad and AT&T pricing, etc.


"News" <News@Group.Name> wrote in message
news:BumdnQeQa5FEIPzWnZ2dnUVZ_vti4p2d@speakeasy.ne t...
> iPad 3G another AT&T exclusive! wrote:
> >
> > I expect additional versions of the iPad/iPhone in a May/June time
> > frame that will add even more capabilities including making it a full
> > blown iPhone.

>
> Yeah, just imagine.... Holding that drinks tray up to your ear.


Considering many "experts" are saying you're better off using a headset
instead of holding a mobile phone to your ear, the only real problem with an
iPad as a mobile phone is that it doesn't fit in your pocket ... then again
many women have handbags, students have bags, management have briefcases,
etc. and with a bluetooth headset you don't need to have the device on
display ... except of course if you're either a moron who wants to get
mugged or a desperate "look at me" show-off.



Reply With Quote
  #64 (permalink)  
Old 01-28-2010, 07:58 PM
NightStalker
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: NEWS: Apple iPad and AT&T pricing, etc.

In article <4b609dbe$0$1633$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net>,
scharf.steven@geemail.com says...
>
> The eBook capability is another great feature. This is _really_ going to
> hurt sales of the Kindle and the Sony eBook readers, as well as the sale
> of content. Unless those companies want to sell their eBook readers for
> $100-150, they're history.
>
>


The Kindle's battery life is superb - we have two and they go for
between three and four weeks at LEAST, between charges. And my wife in
particular does a LOT of reading.

No way will an active screen and unit like the iPad have battery life
like that.

I think the eBook reading facilities on it will be a sideline.

--

NightStalker

Reply With Quote
  #65 (permalink)  
Old 01-28-2010, 08:18 PM
NightStalker
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: NEWS: Apple iPad

In article <2fGdnU_aQNK1UP3WnZ2dnUVZ_sRi4p2d@speakeasy.net> ,
News@Groups.Name says...
>
> > Nokia must be laughing their asses off in Helsinki.....
> >

>
>


Is this the same Nokia whose profits just got slammed 78%?

But I tend to agree that the iPad is very underwhelming, apart from the
"I gotta have one now because I'll be uncool if I don't" factor.

And here in Australia, where I already pay $90 a month for 1Gb of data
on the Telstra NextG network for my iPhone - the only choice if you want
any coverage anywhere outside the cities - I just can't wait to see how
much they will charge on top of that for a data plan for the iPad.
Particularly since the iPhone (or any phone) would still be necessary,
as you can't make calls on the iPad (one would look pretty stupid with
one of those held up to the ear!).

And that's assuming that one can actually GET a connection - huge chunks
of Australia are without any type of cellphone or internet connection,
once you move away from the big population centres.

--

NightStalker

Reply With Quote
  #66 (permalink)  
Old 01-28-2010, 09:44 PM
Todd Allcock
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: NEWS: Apple iPad and AT&T pricing, etc.


"Tom Harrington" <tph@pcisys.no.spam.dammit.net> wrote in message
news:tph-F773E8.11275128012010@localhost...
> In article <ZO98n.14507$3W2.9050@newsfe14.iad>,
> Todd Allcock <elecconnec@AnoOspamL.com> wrote:
>
>> I'll be interesting to see what Apple uses for DRM. If they use the
>> existing Adobe ADEPT system, like Sony, then iPad users could take
>> advantage of the wealth of public libraries who lend ePub books via the
>> Overdive DRM system, which expire and become unreadable after the lending
>> period is over.
>>
>> Of course, if iPad supports ADEPT, you'd also be able to purchase ePub
>> content outside of iBooks/Tunes, so I don't quite picture that
>> happening...

>
> Well, you can already buy music from Amazon and other places and play it
> on the iPod or iPhone, so it's not like there isn't precedent.


I'm not sure that's a good example. Amazon, etc., sell music without any
DRM. I'm secure in the belief that if any bookseller starts selling EPub
books without DRM, the iPad will display them without an issue. (Which
hopefully, will be the direction the future eventually takes. eReader is on
the right track- the books contain your personal information- name, email
and credit card number used to purchase it embedded and encrypted inside-
which would make anyone think twice before sharing those books on the
interwebs.

No one expects an iPod to play DRM music intended for a Zune, for example
(or vice versa), but since the iPad is essentially an extension of the
iPhone/iPod Touch ecosystem, this potentially puts Apple in an awkward spot.
The question is if the iPad will allow competing DRM eBooks on their device
(via third-party apps, presumably- I wouldn't really expect Apple to add
native support for competitors' content stores!)

"Kindle for iPhone" seemed like quite a coup before Apple had designs on the
eBook business. I wonder if Apple will be as happy with the idea of "Kindle
for iPad"? It's been assumed that the iPad will be compatible with
iPhone/iPod Touch software, so will iPhone eBook software be welcome on the
iPad? Or blocked as a violation of the "no duplicate functionality" rules?
This is the double-edged sword of "apps." Apple attempts to tread the fine
line between "internet appliance" and "computer" with devices like the
iPhone and now the iPad. It's hard to open a device up to third-party apps
like a computer, yet try to contain a closed ecosystem like an appliance.

No one is shocked that something like a Kindle can't run "apps" because it's
firmly positioned as a single-function appliance. But it's hard to
understand why an iPhone that can run third-party apps, and has 140,000 apps
available, still has ANY limitations that third-party apps could address,
but do not.

Should be interesting to see how it all develops...




Reply With Quote
  #67 (permalink)  
Old 01-28-2010, 10:11 PM
Todd Allcock
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: NEWS: Apple iPad and AT&T pricing, etc.


"Michelle Steiner" <michelle@michelle.org> wrote in message
news:michelle-5C5A9A.12480028012010@news.eternal-september.org...
> In article <slrnhm2dh2.5c.dcferguson@akit-ferguson.com>,
> Dennis Ferguson <dcferguson@pacbell.net> wrote:
>
>> At least with the iPhone, if you are desperate to do this anyway you can
>> always take the SIM out of it and put it in another phone with fewer
>> constraints. The iPad's new, improved teeny tiny micro SIM (are they
>> really so space-constrained in there that they had to do that?) won't
>> fit in any existing phone so even that's out now.

>
> There are (or soon will be, if there aren't already) adaptors.


That'll work in one direction- using the iPad SIM in a phone, which AT&T
likely won't allow anyway. I think Dennis' point was the difficulty of
placing the "unlocked" iPad on a non-"partner" carrier. T-Mobile, for
example, right here in the USA doesn't use these SIMs, and likely won't be
anytime soon, so there will be no way to use this "unlocked" device on
another carrier in the USA.

>> And what are you supposed to do if you travel overseas with your nice,
>> unlocked iPad? Will there now be how-to videos on how to cut up
>> a standard-size SIM card from the overseas carrier to fit in the teeny
>> holder, like the iPhone battery replacement videos of old?

>
> You don't think that overseas carriers won't have micro-SIMs for the iPad?



The "partner" carriers who also sell the iPad will, of course, but like here
in the US, that effectively disallows one from competitively pitting
carriers against each other. If I were, say, the English "partner" carrier,
I could sell US roamers a uSIM and service at an inflated price (as long as
it's cheaper than AT&T roaming rates)- far above what I sell "full size"
SIMs and service for.

As Dennis said, it seems ironic that one of the largest devices you can
stick a SIM card into requires the use of an as yet unused micro-sized SIM.
Originally, SIM cards were smartcards the size of credit cards. The current
thumbnail-sized SIMs we use today were to facilitate the manufacture of
smaller phones- not larger ones!

>> I noticed, for example, that if you go out and pay full price
>> for an unlocked, carrier-free iPhone, and then go out and pay
>> top dollar for a tethering data plan, you still don't get to
>> tether your iPhone unless the carrier is one of those which Apple
>> has graciously allowed to grease Apple's palm with kickbacks;

>
> It is strictly up to the carrier as to whether it will allow tethering.


Again, that's a pat answer for parter carriers who have to support the
iPhone in their infrastructure. The flaw is that the iPhone essentially has
to "ask" a carrier for a download of settings to enable tethering, which no
other phone does. Carriers who don't sell iPhones have no reason to set
their system up to push settings to phones they don't sell or support, any
more than AT&T would set their network up to push settings to a T-Mobile G1
Google phone.

> Unless you have evidence to back up your kickback claim, that claim is
> just
> plain FOS.


Actually it was a reasoned, rational theory, and sparked an interesting
discussion.


>> I guess picking a non-standard "standard" for the SIM, no doubt
>> initially available only from special carriers with special
>> Apple-approved data plans, is an even more effective method than just
>> defeaturing the device to encourage you to do what Apple wants with your
>> purchase, rather than what you'd like?

>
> Guess all you want, but please rein in your paranoid fantasies.


It doesn't seem paranoid to me- it makes perfect sense. If nothing else, it
gives AT&T and other partner carriers a de facto exclusive on the iPad for
awhile, until other carriers eventually transition to the new SIMs, without
having to subsidize the device at all.

"Locking" an unlocked device to a particular service by non-traditional
means is nothing new. I sent my mother a T-Mobile Cameo last summer- the
Cameo is a digital picture frame that can receive digital pictures by MMS
over T-Mobile's network. (This allows me to easily send her pictures of her
grandkids, since she doesn't use a computer.) For $2/month, the Cameo can
receive unlimited MMS messages- essentially the Cameo's a phone with an
unlimited messaging plan for $24/year. T-Mobile places a standard SIM in
every Cameo, but glues it in place so people can't move this $2 unlimited
service to any other phone or device.




Reply With Quote
  #68 (permalink)  
Old 01-28-2010, 10:32 PM
nospam
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: NEWS: Apple iPad and AT&T pricing, etc.

In article <WQo8n.40460$U83.7333@newsfe10.iad>, Todd Allcock
<elecconnec@AnoOspamL.com> wrote:

> That'll work in one direction- using the iPad SIM in a phone, which AT&T
> likely won't allow anyway. I think Dennis' point was the difficulty of
> placing the "unlocked" iPad on a non-"partner" carrier. T-Mobile, for
> example, right here in the USA doesn't use these SIMs, and likely won't be
> anytime soon, so there will be no way to use this "unlocked" device on
> another carrier in the USA.


what makes you think they won't be using them any time soon? here is a
device that *can* work on t-mobile without any hacks. why would they
ignore that?

> The "partner" carriers who also sell the iPad will, of course, but like here
> in the US, that effectively disallows one from competitively pitting
> carriers against each other. If I were, say, the English "partner" carrier,
> I could sell US roamers a uSIM and service at an inflated price (as long as
> it's cheaper than AT&T roaming rates)- far above what I sell "full size"
> SIMs and service for.


they can't compete against one another?

> Originally, SIM cards were smartcards the size of credit cards. The current
> thumbnail-sized SIMs we use today were to facilitate the manufacture of
> smaller phones- not larger ones!


when phones transitioned from credit card sized sims to the current
small ones, did people *****? did people accuse whichever company was
first of making a phone that required only manufacturer approved
carriers?

> Again, that's a pat answer for parter carriers who have to support the
> iPhone in their infrastructure. The flaw is that the iPhone essentially has
> to "ask" a carrier for a download of settings to enable tethering, which no
> other phone does.


all phones need appropriate apn settings for the respective carrier.

> Carriers who don't sell iPhones have no reason to set
> their system up to push settings to phones they don't sell or support, any
> more than AT&T would set their network up to push settings to a T-Mobile G1
> Google phone.


t-mobile is only too happy to support the iphone.

> It doesn't seem paranoid to me- it makes perfect sense. If nothing else, it
> gives AT&T and other partner carriers a de facto exclusive on the iPad for
> awhile, until other carriers eventually transition to the new SIMs, without
> having to subsidize the device at all.


which means it's *not* exclusive. all they need to do is distribute the
new sims and they have three months in which to do that.

at&t has had 8 months and can't figure out how to offer tethering.
t-mobile should be able to get a bunch of sims in that time to their
stores. instant new revenue.

> "Locking" an unlocked device to a particular service by non-traditional
> means is nothing new. I sent my mother a T-Mobile Cameo last summer- the
> Cameo is a digital picture frame that can receive digital pictures by MMS
> over T-Mobile's network. (This allows me to easily send her pictures of her
> grandkids, since she doesn't use a computer.) For $2/month, the Cameo can
> receive unlimited MMS messages- essentially the Cameo's a phone with an
> unlimited messaging plan for $24/year. T-Mobile places a standard SIM in
> every Cameo, but glues it in place so people can't move this $2 unlimited
> service to any other phone or device.


and at&t now sim-locks pay as you go phones. the sim can be removed,
but it won't work in any other phone, at least for 6 months or whatever
the time period is.

Reply With Quote
  #69 (permalink)  
Old 01-28-2010, 11:21 PM
Todd Allcock
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: NEWS: Apple iPad and AT&T pricing, etc.


"nospam" <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote in message
news:280120101832022756%nospam@nospam.invalid...
> In article <WQo8n.40460$U83.7333@newsfe10.iad>, Todd Allcock
> <elecconnec@AnoOspamL.com> wrote:
>
>> That'll work in one direction- using the iPad SIM in a phone, which AT&T
>> likely won't allow anyway. I think Dennis' point was the difficulty of
>> placing the "unlocked" iPad on a non-"partner" carrier. T-Mobile, for
>> example, right here in the USA doesn't use these SIMs, and likely won't
>> be
>> anytime soon, so there will be no way to use this "unlocked" device on
>> another carrier in the USA.

>
> what makes you think they won't be using them any time soon? here is a
> device that *can* work on t-mobile without any hacks. why would they
> ignore that?


Lack of revenue. The iPad lacks voice capability, so it'd be limited to a
data only plan, which T-Mobile sells for $5 MORE than AT&T. In addition,
the iPad only works on T-Mobile in EDGE mode, as it lacks T-Mo's oddball AWS
frequency. You'd have to really just want to spite AT&T to be willing to
pay more to use a slower network. Ergo, anyone wanting to use an iPad in
the USA on a cellular network other than AT&T would be better off saving the
$130, buying the non-3G model, and tethering the iPad via WiFi to an
existing WinMo or Symbian smartphone, or a "MyFi" device. Particularly
those who also use an iPod Touch, since they could kill two birds with one
dataplan.

My guess is that T-Mo will not lift a finger to support this device, since
the ability to disappoint customers with 2G-only service is too great. If
someone manages to hack their SIM with scissors or somekind of adapter, T-Mo
will take their money, but they won't be rushing out an obtaining uSIMs in
anticipation of a stampede that isn't going to come.


>> The "partner" carriers who also sell the iPad will, of course, but like
>> here
>> in the US, that effectively disallows one from competitively pitting
>> carriers against each other. If I were, say, the English "partner"
>> carrier,
>> I could sell US roamers a uSIM and service at an inflated price (as long
>> as
>> it's cheaper than AT&T roaming rates)- far above what I sell "full size"
>> SIMs and service for.

>
> they can't compete against one another?


In those countries with multiple partners, yes. In countries with one, it's
not likely- again, while I fully expect this device to be successful for a
tablet, it's just not going to sell in iPhone/iPod Touch volumes- it's an
example of a solution looking for a problem- there isn't a pent up demand of
people just waiting for the right tablet to come along, and it's too high
priced to convert or cannibalize the eBook reader market, IMO. It's likely
to be an outstanding selling "niche" device.


>> Originally, SIM cards were smartcards the size of credit cards. The
>> current
>> thumbnail-sized SIMs we use today were to facilitate the manufacture of
>> smaller phones- not larger ones!

>
> when phones transitioned from credit card sized sims to the current
> small ones, did people *****? did people accuse whichever company was
> first of making a phone that required only manufacturer approved
> carriers?


No, because at least in the US, the new SIMs debuted BEFORE the new phones
that could only use them appeared. (Remember that big plastic "holder" you
snapped your SIM out of? That's the old SIM size. Ten years later, SIMs
still are backwards compatible with equipment no one uses any longer!)
Before anyone saw a phone that took the new SIMs, big SIM cards with the
"funny cutout" were already in common use and being supplied by carriers.

In contrast, the iPad was displayed before the SIMs it uses were. If AT&T
(or T-Mobile) was indeed transistioning to this new SIM anytime within the
next few months, we'd probably have started seeing them in the supply chain
already.

>> Again, that's a pat answer for parter carriers who have to support the
>> iPhone in their infrastructure. The flaw is that the iPhone essentially
>> has
>> to "ask" a carrier for a download of settings to enable tethering, which
>> no
>> other phone does.

>
> all phones need appropriate apn settings for the respective carrier.


Yes- but they don't poll the carrier for them. They allow you to select
from the existing APNs already programmed in the phone, or add new ones if
necessary. Since AT&T phones can tether using the same APN as they use for
on-phone data, what "setting" exactly is the iPhone needing, other that
using this as excuse to disallow tethering until the carrier is prepared to
enable it, which is fine for partner carriers, but problematic for other
carriers who support tethering, but haven't bothered to add specific support
for a single model of phone that they don't sell, but requires a specific
"blessing" to enable a feature that all other tethering-capable phones
simply support out of the box.


>> Carriers who don't sell iPhones have no reason to set
>> their system up to push settings to phones they don't sell or support,
>> any
>> more than AT&T would set their network up to push settings to a T-Mobile
>> G1
>> Google phone.

>
> t-mobile is only too happy to support the iphone.


Sure, but they don't push any iPhone-specific settings it. They "support"
it like any other unlocked handset they don't sell: they provide limited
tech support, but wash their hands of it if end-users can't manage to
configure it themselves.


>> It doesn't seem paranoid to me- it makes perfect sense. If nothing else,
>> it
>> gives AT&T and other partner carriers a de facto exclusive on the iPad
>> for
>> awhile, until other carriers eventually transition to the new SIMs,
>> without
>> having to subsidize the device at all.

>
> which means it's *not* exclusive. all they need to do is distribute the
> new sims and they have three months in which to do that.
>
> at&t has had 8 months and can't figure out how to offer tethering.
> t-mobile should be able to get a bunch of sims in that time to their
> stores. instant new revenue.


Why would they distribute new SIMs to support a single non-phone device with
a small potential user base? (The subset of iPad owners willing to use it
on a 2G network for more money than AT&T charges?)

>> "Locking" an unlocked device to a particular service by non-traditional
>> means is nothing new. I sent my mother a T-Mobile Cameo last summer- the
>> Cameo is a digital picture frame that can receive digital pictures by MMS
>> over T-Mobile's network. (This allows me to easily send her pictures of
>> her
>> grandkids, since she doesn't use a computer.) For $2/month, the Cameo
>> can
>> receive unlimited MMS messages- essentially the Cameo's a phone with an
>> unlimited messaging plan for $24/year. T-Mobile places a standard SIM in
>> every Cameo, but glues it in place so people can't move this $2 unlimited
>> service to any other phone or device.

>
> and at&t now sim-locks pay as you go phones. the sim can be removed,
> but it won't work in any other phone, at least for 6 months or whatever
> the time period is.


Yes and no- the SIM-to-phone lock only applies if you signup with the "free
airtime" promotional offer that comes with the phone. You can take the
prepaid SIM, activate without the promo code, and use it anyway you like.
Regardless, the PAYG phone itself is not affected in anyway- you can unlock
it and use it anyway you like.





Reply With Quote
  #70 (permalink)  
Old 01-28-2010, 11:54 PM
nospam
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: NEWS: Apple iPad and AT&T pricing, etc.

In article <9Sp8n.28206$_96.16329@newsfe02.iad>, Todd Allcock
<elecconnec@AnoOspamL.com> wrote:

> "nospam" <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote in message
> news:280120101832022756%nospam@nospam.invalid...
> > In article <WQo8n.40460$U83.7333@newsfe10.iad>, Todd Allcock
> > <elecconnec@AnoOspamL.com> wrote:
> >
> >> That'll work in one direction- using the iPad SIM in a phone, which AT&T
> >> likely won't allow anyway. I think Dennis' point was the difficulty of
> >> placing the "unlocked" iPad on a non-"partner" carrier. T-Mobile, for
> >> example, right here in the USA doesn't use these SIMs, and likely won't
> >> be
> >> anytime soon, so there will be no way to use this "unlocked" device on
> >> another carrier in the USA.

> >
> > what makes you think they won't be using them any time soon? here is a
> > device that *can* work on t-mobile without any hacks. why would they
> > ignore that?

>
> Lack of revenue. The iPad lacks voice capability, so it'd be limited to a
> data only plan, which T-Mobile sells for $5 MORE than AT&T.


up until yesterday, at&t offered 100 meg for $20/mo on pay as you go
and now it's $15 for 250 meg. is there something that prevents t-mobile
from coming up with a similarly priced plan? since it will only work on
2g, they can seriously undercut at&t.

> In addition,
> the iPad only works on T-Mobile in EDGE mode, as it lacks T-Mo's oddball AWS
> frequency. You'd have to really just want to spite AT&T to be willing to
> pay more to use a slower network. Ergo, anyone wanting to use an iPad in
> the USA on a cellular network other than AT&T would be better off saving the
> $130, buying the non-3G model, and tethering the iPad via WiFi to an
> existing WinMo or Symbian smartphone, or a "MyFi" device. Particularly
> those who also use an iPod Touch, since they could kill two birds with one
> dataplan.


more to carry. what if t-mo's plan is $9.99/mo? or even less? what if
its like the sidekick plan at $1 day only when used (which is a little
different than the sidekick plan)? or what if it's $5/mo add-on for
existing voice customers? maybe they can score some new voice customers
too.

> My guess is that T-Mo will not lift a finger to support this device, since
> the ability to disappoint customers with 2G-only service is too great. If
> someone manages to hack their SIM with scissors or somekind of adapter, T-Mo
> will take their money, but they won't be rushing out an obtaining uSIMs in
> anticipation of a stampede that isn't going to come.


my guess is they're going to want to support it because of the strong
dislike of at&t.

2g that works trumps 3g that doesn't.

> > they can't compete against one another?

>
> In those countries with multiple partners, yes. In countries with one, it's
> not likely- again, while I fully expect this device to be successful for a
> tablet, it's just not going to sell in iPhone/iPod Touch volumes- it's an
> example of a solution looking for a problem- there isn't a pent up demand of
> people just waiting for the right tablet to come along, and it's too high
> priced to convert or cannibalize the eBook reader market, IMO. It's likely
> to be an outstanding selling "niche" device.


seems i've heard that before. who is going to buy an overpriced mp3
player, $399 for 5 gig (for the original ipod). who is going to buy a 4
gig ipod mini for $249 when a 20 gig regular ipod is just $299. turned
out to be the best selling ipod, only to be replaced with a *smaller*
capacity nano that sold even *better*.

> In contrast, the iPad was displayed before the SIMs it uses were. If AT&T
> (or T-Mobile) was indeed transistioning to this new SIM anytime within the
> next few months, we'd probably have started seeing them in the supply chain
> already.


they have three months to fill the supply chain. check back in april or
may.

> > all phones need appropriate apn settings for the respective carrier.

>
> Yes- but they don't poll the carrier for them.


so what's t-mobile's configurator? granted, the user 'polls' and gets
the data pushed to the phone, but the effect is the same, it's just not
automatic.

> They allow you to select
> from the existing APNs already programmed in the phone, or add new ones if
> necessary. Since AT&T phones can tether using the same APN as they use for
> on-phone data, what "setting" exactly is the iPhone needing, other that
> using this as excuse to disallow tethering until the carrier is prepared to
> enable it, which is fine for partner carriers, but problematic for other
> carriers who support tethering, but haven't bothered to add specific support
> for a single model of phone that they don't sell, but requires a specific
> "blessing" to enable a feature that all other tethering-capable phones
> simply support out of the box.


at&t has demonstrated that they are incompetent lying buffoons. i don't
know what the holdup is, but my guess is that they are petrified that
their fragile network will crumble under the additional load. we know
that tethering works since people have circumvented the blocks, so it's
nothing more than an administrative restriction.

> > t-mobile is only too happy to support the iphone.

>
> Sure, but they don't push any iPhone-specific settings it. They "support"
> it like any other unlocked handset they don't sell: they provide limited
> tech support, but wash their hands of it if end-users can't manage to
> configure it themselves.


they need to push their apn info to it.

> Why would they distribute new SIMs to support a single non-phone device with
> a small potential user base? (The subset of iPad owners willing to use it
> on a 2G network for more money than AT&T charges?)


because distributing a new sim costs them almost nothing and it's a
very easy way to get new customers and additional revenue.

Reply With Quote
  #71 (permalink)  
Old 01-29-2010, 01:17 AM
nospam
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: NEWS: Apple iPad and AT&T pricing, etc.

In article <michelle-110387.19090228012010@nothing.attdns.com>,
Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote:

> > t-mobile is only too happy to support the iphone.

>
> Tell me about it. Those T-Mobile kiosks in the malls are staffed by some
> of the most aggressive salesdroids I've ever encountered. They want to
> convert iPhone owners to T-Mobile


i wandered into a t-mobile store a year ago to check out the then new
g1 android phone. i saw one of the employees playing with not one, but
two iphones. he said they get a lot of customers who want to use it on
t-mobile and they're happy to oblige.

Reply With Quote
  #72 (permalink)  
Old 01-29-2010, 01:19 AM
nospam
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: NEWS: Apple iPad and AT&T pricing, etc.

In article <michelle-8FA894.18491928012010@nothing.attdns.com>,
Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote:

> I don't see why anyone using an iPad (or an iPhone 3G or 3GS) would want to
> use T-Mobile in the US; their 3G is not compatible with the iPhone's 3G.
> It will work with their 2G, though.


2g that works trumps 3g that doesn't.

Reply With Quote
  #73 (permalink)  
Old 01-29-2010, 01:48 AM
nospam
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: NEWS: Apple iPad and AT&T pricing, etc.

In article <michelle-303DF0.19373528012010@nothing.attdns.com>,
Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote:

> > > I don't see why anyone using an iPad (or an iPhone 3G or 3GS) would
> > > want to use T-Mobile in the US; their 3G is not compatible with the
> > > iPhone's 3G. It will work with their 2G, though.

> >
> > 2g that works trumps 3g that doesn't.

>
> 3g works around here. And unless I'm mistaken, T-Mobile covers less of the
> country with 3G than AT&T does.


true, but their 3g coverage doesn't matter to iphone/ipad users. their
2g coverage is pretty good and it's not overloaded like at&t's 3g
network, so it might actually end up being faster. might even be priced
lower too, since an ipad user won't ever use 3g.

Reply With Quote
  #74 (permalink)  
Old 01-29-2010, 02:14 AM
SMS
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: NEWS: Apple iPad and AT&T pricing, etc.

nospam wrote:
> In article <michelle-8FA894.18491928012010@nothing.attdns.com>,
> Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote:
>
>> I don't see why anyone using an iPad (or an iPhone 3G or 3GS) would want to
>> use T-Mobile in the US; their 3G is not compatible with the iPhone's 3G.
>> It will work with their 2G, though.

>
> 2g that works trumps 3g that doesn't.


Actually, if you look at some of the tests on actual data rates (not
theoretical maximum data rates) often T-Mobile's 2G is not significantly
slower than AT&T's 3G. Of course eventually AT&T will increase their 3G
capacity and that won't be the case anymore. But if T-Mobile offered
unlimited 2G data on the iPad for $15/month they might get a lot of takers.

Reply With Quote
  #75 (permalink)  
Old 01-29-2010, 02:34 AM
Tom Harrington
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: NEWS: Apple iPad and AT&T pricing, etc.

In article <Kro8n.28201$_96.19225@newsfe02.iad>,
"Todd Allcock" <elecconnec@AnoOspamL.com> wrote:

> "Kindle for iPhone" seemed like quite a coup before Apple had designs on the
> eBook business. I wonder if Apple will be as happy with the idea of "Kindle
> for iPad"? It's been assumed that the iPad will be compatible with
> iPhone/iPod Touch software, so will iPhone eBook software be welcome on the
> iPad? Or blocked as a violation of the "no duplicate functionality" rules?
> This is the double-edged sword of "apps." Apple attempts to tread the fine
> line between "internet appliance" and "computer" with devices like the
> iPhone and now the iPad. It's hard to open a device up to third-party apps
> like a computer, yet try to contain a closed ecosystem like an appliance.


I didn't realize this was what you meant. It's a fair question, and one
supported by Apple's previous app-store decisions. I couldn't honestly
say I expect them to allow it, given their history of app store
rejections.

--
Tom "Tom" Harrington
Independent Mac OS X developer since 2002
http://www.atomicbird.com/

Reply With Quote
  #76 (permalink)  
Old 01-29-2010, 06:31 AM
Todd Allcock
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: NEWS: Apple iPad and AT&T pricing, etc.

At 28 Jan 2010 19:54:40 -0500 nospam wrote:


> > >> I think Dennis' point was the difficulty of
> > >> placing the "unlocked" iPad on a non-"partner" carrier. T-Mobile,
> > >> for example, right here in the USA doesn't use these SIMs, and
> > >> likely won't be anytime soon, so there will be no way to use this
> > >> "unlocked" device on
> > >> another carrier in the USA.
> > >
> > > what makes you think they won't be using them any time soon? here
> > > is a device that *can* work on t-mobile without any hacks. why
> > > would they ignore that?

> >
> > Lack of revenue. The iPad lacks voice capability, so it'd be limited
> > to a data only plan, which T-Mobile sells for $5 MORE than AT&T.

>
> up until yesterday, at&t offered 100 meg for $20/mo on pay as you go
> and now it's $15 for 250 meg. is there something that prevents t-mobile
> from coming up with a similarly priced plan? since it will only work on
> 2g, they can seriously undercut at&t.



Well, unlike AT&T, T-Mo sells neither a metered internet plan, nor a la
carte (per KB/M data, so selling anything other than an unlimited plan
would probably require serious systemic changes in their billing system.
Not worth it for the miniscule number of customers this product would
bring to T-Mo.

Plus, since SIM cards are easily swapped between devices, any low-ball
iPad specific plan's SIM could easily be moved to other devices- even 3G
devices. There isn't a separate 3G APN. Any compatible 3G device will
get 3G service on any T-Mo data plan.


> > In addition,
> > the iPad only works on T-Mobile in EDGE mode, as it lacks T-Mo's
> > oddball AWS frequency. You'd have to really just want to spite AT&T
> > to be willing to
> > pay more to use a slower network. Ergo, anyone wanting to use an
> > iPad in the USA on a cellular network other than AT&T would be
> > better off saving the
> > $130, buying the non-3G model, and tethering the iPad via WiFi to an
> > existing WinMo or Symbian smartphone, or a "MyFi" device.
> > Particularly those who also use an iPod Touch, since they could kill
> > two birds with one dataplan.

>
> more to carry.


Huh? You think people are going to carry an iPad _instead_ of a phone?
Of course not, so they'll be carrying two devices anyway- this and a phone.

If they're carrying a smartphone that can act as a WiFi AP (WinMo, Symbian,

jailbroken iPhone) they don't need 3G, or a separate data plan, on the
iPad.- they can just connect to the smartphone's "MyFi."


> what if t-mo's plan is $9.99/mo? or even less? what if
> its like the sidekick plan at $1 day only when used (which is a little
> different than the sidekick plan)? or what if it's $5/mo add-on for
> existing voice customers? maybe they can score some new voice customers
> too.



What if, as I suspect, none of that happens? T-Mo has traditionally sold
data inexpensively, to compensate for a lack of a 3G network, but has
bent over backwards in the last year, since launching 3G, to rectify that
situation! In addition, T-Mo has steadfastly avoided selling data to
PAYG customers, with the exception of the Sidekick, which is probably a
demographics issue (Sidekick customers tend to be young and have little to
no credit history.)

Also, just like other carriers, T-Mo doesn't tier data plans by device
speed
(2G/3G)- that would open a huge kettle of worms when 2G phone users
suddenly want to know why they don't get a discount like iPad users do,
in addition to the potential "wandering SIM" issue- sign up for your
mythical $9.99 iPad plan and then move your iPad SIM into a 3G laptop
data card or smartphone. T-Mo would now have to put systemic guards in
place to prevent this. Not impossible, but again, why bother for a non-
existant demand? T-Mo USA reportedly has about 1,000,000 iPhones on
their system, and T-Mo doesn't give those customers any special rates for
being stuck at 2G- and there are plenty more potential iPhone defectors
to attract from AT&T by offering special deals than potential iPad users.
I think the iPad looks like a neat gadget, but it isn't going to sell in
iPod/iPhone quantities!


> > My guess is that T-Mo will not lift a finger to support this device,

since
> > the ability to disappoint customers with 2G-only service is too

great. If
> > someone manages to hack their SIM with scissors or somekind of adapter,


T-Mo
> > will take their money, but they won't be rushing out an obtaining

uSIMs in
> > anticipation of a stampede that isn't going to come.

>
> my guess is they're going to want to support it because of the strong
> dislike of at&t.



Again, if that were true, where is their "bring us your iPhone" campaign?



> 2g that works trumps 3g that doesn't.


True- but AT&T 2G works fine as well, without having to eschew 3G entirely.



> > > they can't compete against one another?

> >
> > In those countries with multiple partners, yes. In countries with one,


it's
> > not likely- again, while I fully expect this device to be successful

for a
> > tablet, it's just not going to sell in iPhone/iPod Touch volumes-

it's an
> > example of a solution looking for a problem- there isn't a pent up

demand of
> > people just waiting for the right tablet to come along, and it's too

high
> > priced to convert or cannibalize the eBook reader market, IMO. It's

likely
> > to be an outstanding selling "niche" device.

>
> seems i've heard that before. who is going to buy an overpriced mp3
> player, $399 for 5 gig (for the original ipod). who is going to buy a 4
> gig ipod mini for $249 when a 20 gig regular ipod is just $299. turned
> out to be the best selling ipod, only to be replaced with a *smaller*
> capacity nano that sold even *better*.


Even you can't believe a million people will be carrying a portfolio-
sized tablet everywhere they go 3-6 months from now, can you? I think
this thing will sell extremely well- _for a tablet_, and perhaps even
slightly dent the netbook market, but I suspect the majority will be sold
without 3G.

Ever use an iPhone on T-Mo? Surfing that "real web" with Safari over
EDGE isn't pretty. It's only tolerable on my WinMo phone since I stick
to WAP pages or use Opera Mini's proxied browser for surfing the "real
web"- it compresses webpages "up to 90%", (but typically about 60%, IME,)
at Opera's server which dramatically increases browsing speed.


> > In contrast, the iPad was displayed before the SIMs it uses were. If

AT&T
> > (or T-Mobile) was indeed transistioning to this new SIM anytime

within the
> > next few months, we'd probably have started seeing them in the supply

chain
> > already.

>
> they have three months to fill the supply chain. check back in april or
> may.


Hopefully they'll have the half-dozen or so uSIMs they'll need for the
onslaught by then...

> > > all phones need appropriate apn settings for the respective carrier.

> >
> > Yes- but they don't poll the carrier for them.

>
> so what's t-mobile's configurator? granted, the user 'polls' and gets
> the data pushed to the phone, but the effect is the same, it's just not
> automatic.



No, T-Mo doesn't push any data settings into phones any longer (they used
to have an online form you filled in with phone make/model and your phone
number, and they SMS'd the proper settings in a spcial configuration
message) but since they launched 3G, on a non-standard frequency, they
are actively discouraging the use of non-T-Mo-branded equipment. Not
prohibiting it- just discouraging it. For example, they now charge the
higher smartphone data rate to all customers who add data to non-T-Mo
phones- even dumbphones. Only T-Mo-branded dumbphones can get the lower
dumbphone data plan. This policy makes it hard t believe they'll court
iPad users with lower rates- I suspect they'll be offered the "stanard"
data-only rate: $40/month.

Their "configurator" is now a web page that tells you to punch
"wap.voicestream.com" into the APN screen on your phone, and if your
phone doesn't have such a screen, you should check out T-Mo's selection
of phones.


> at&t has demonstrated that they are incompetent lying buffoons. i don't
> know what the holdup is, but my guess is that they are petrified that
> their fragile network will crumble under the additional load. we know
> that tethering works since people have circumvented the blocks, so it's
> nothing more than an administrative restriction.



Of course, but it's one that virtually any other smartphone can circumvent,

because they don't need to receive a secret handshake from AT&T first.


> > > t-mobile is only too happy to support the iphone.

> >
> > Sure, but they don't push any iPhone-specific settings it. They

"support"
> > it like any other unlocked handset they don't sell: they provide

limited
> > tech support, but wash their hands of it if end-users can't manage to
> > configure it themselves.

>
> they need to push their apn info to it.



Regardless of what they "need" to do, the fact is that they don't do
anything of the sort.

They've never pushed settings to phone models they didn't sell- but back
when they
pushed data settings OTA, (that ended about a year ago) you could just
select a model similar to one of theirs (e.g. I could get settings for my
AT&T Nokia 3620 by selecting T-Mo's Nokia 3650.)

However, there is no "similar" model to an iPhone. You can send
configuration SMSes formatted for Nokias, Samsungs, or Motorolas to an
iPhone all day, and the iPhone
won't program, so iPhone users have always had to configure their data
settings
themselves.



> > Why would they distribute new SIMs to support a single non-phone

device with
> > a small potential user base? (The subset of iPad owners willing to

use it
> > on a 2G network for more money than AT&T charges?)

>
> because distributing a new sim costs them almost nothing and it's a
> very easy way to get new customers and additional revenue.



We'll see. I can't imagine anyone paying $130 extra for the 3G module so
they can run to a company that can only offer 2G service to it.



Reply With Quote
  #77 (permalink)  
Old 01-29-2010, 06:31 AM
Larry
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: NEWS: Apple iPad and AT&T pricing, etc.

your.name@isp.com (Your Name) wrote in news:your.name-2801101619060001@
203-109-168-103.dial.dyn.ihug.co.nz:

> In article <michelle-719234.17535227012010@news.eternal-

september.org>,
> Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote:
>
>> In article <Xns9D0DC80B9B77Bnoonehomecom@74.209.131.13>,
>> Larry <noone@home.com> wrote:
>>
>> > >> DivX
>> > >>
>> > >> XviD
>> > >>
>> > >> Realplayer
>> > >>
>> > >> Windows Media
>> > >
>> > > Why bother with those ancient and outmoded technologies?
>> >
>> > Because those are the codecs plus Flash that 99% of the internet

uses?
>>
>> Yeah, a few sites still use them, but not all that many.
>>
>> Oh, by the way concerning your rant about eBooks: The iPad uses the

ePub
>> format, which is a free, open, and non-proprietary format.
>> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EPUB>

>
> Not to mention the numerous free ebooks available in plain text

formats.
>


I've been watching Adobe and missed a few.....

No flv

No Flash

No Adobe ebooks either

the list gets longer and longer.....and you can't do anything about it
like a real computer....


Reply With Quote
  #78 (permalink)  
Old 01-29-2010, 06:32 AM
Larry
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: NEWS: Apple iPad and AT&T pricing, etc.

nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote in news:270120102327038504%
nospam@nospam.invalid:

> In article <Xns9D0DCAD1A1FE6noonehomecom@74.209.131.13>, Larry
> <noone@home.com> wrote:
>
>> i DO want to see you plug this pig into an ipod dock and drive down a

bumpy
>> road....That would be really fun to see it break off its ******

proprietary
>> connector.

>
> lots of people do that every day.
>


Ipods and Iphones and Itouches are huge waving around iPads.

The torque on this thing will be enormous.


Reply With Quote
  #79 (permalink)  
Old 01-29-2010, 06:33 AM
Todd Allcock
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: NEWS: Apple iPad and AT&T pricing, etc.

At 28 Jan 2010 18:49:19 -0700 Michelle Steiner wrote:

> "Todd Allcock" <elecconnec@AnoOspamL.com> wrote:
>
> > T-Mobile, for example, right here in the USA doesn't use these SIMs,

and
> > likely won't be anytime soon, so there will be no way to use this
> > "unlocked" device on another carrier in the USA.

>
> I don't see why anyone using an iPad (or an iPhone 3G or 3GS) would

want to
> use T-Mobile in the US; their 3G is not compatible with the iPhone's

3G.
> It will work with their 2G, though.



Yes, I agree users won't beating T-Mo's door down for iPad service
(though it's ben estimated nearly 1,000,000 unlocked iPhones are used on
T-Mo, so 3G seems less important to some people.)



> Because the iPad is unlocked, it will work with any GSM network. It
> doesn't have to be an official "partner" network. That's where it
> differs
> from the US; only AT&T has the technology here that works with the iPad
> (at
> least the first generation iPad), but overseas there are multiple
> carriers
> whose technology works with it.


That was kind of Dennis' point, though, wasn't it- if only partner
networks are offering the new uSIMs, the iPad still has a virtual "lock"
on it for the near term, since no other networks use the same technology
(uSIMs). You've got to admit it seems a little ironic, if not a bit
suspicious, that the iPad is the first consumer device to use the new
SIM, and is certainly large enough not to _need_ to!


> > > Unless you have evidence to back up your kickback claim, that claim

is
> > > just plain FOS.

> >
> > Actually it was a reasoned, rational theory, and sparked an
> > interesting discussion.

>
>
> No, it was a paranoid theory, not based on any evidence; in fact, it is
> defamatory, and alleges illegal practices.


What illegal practices? Using a new type of SIM? Unless Apple bribes
the SIM manufacturers to withhold them from certain carriers, it's not
illegal, just clever!



Reply With Quote
  #80 (permalink)  
Old 01-29-2010, 06:34 AM
Larry
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: NEWS: Apple iPad and AT&T pricing, etc.

Todd Allcock <elecconnec@AnoOspamL.com> wrote in news:ZO98n.14507$3W2.9050
@newsfe14.iad:

> At 27 Jan 2010 17:53:52 -0700 Michelle Steiner wrote:
>
>> Oh, by the way concerning your rant about eBooks: The iPad uses the
>> ePub format, which is a free, open, and non-proprietary format.
>> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EPUB>

>
>
> I'll be interesting to see what Apple uses for DRM. If they use the
> existing Adobe ADEPT system, like Sony, then iPad users could take
> advantage of the wealth of public libraries who lend ePub books via the
> Overdive DRM system, which expire and become unreadable after the lending
> period is over.
>
> Of course, if iPad supports ADEPT, you'd also be able to purchase ePub
> content outside of iBooks/Tunes, so I don't quite picture that
> happening...
>
>
>


No ePub support according to the news reports today.

Google Adobe iPad and there's lots of chatter.

Reply With Quote
  #81 (permalink)  
Old 01-29-2010, 06:39 AM
Larry
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: NEWS: Apple iPad and AT&T pricing, etc.

Dennis Ferguson <dcferguson@pacbell.net> wrote in
news:slrnhm2dh2.5c.dcferguson@akit-ferguson.com:

> (are they
> really so space-constrained in there that they had to do that?)
>


Obviously, YES! There was no room for USB ports, firewire ports, SD or
even microSD card slots that had to be an add-on dongle sold for more
moolah, of course. They had so much space problems they couldn't even make
the SD card reader a WRITER! It only allows camera data to "IMPORT".
Apparently, if you put your photos onto the maxiPad off your camera....you
CAN'T GET THEM OFF THE MAXIPAD WHEN YOU GET HOME!

The hackers are gonna love this piece of ****.

Reply With Quote
  #82 (permalink)  
Old 01-29-2010, 06:41 AM
Todd Allcock
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: NEWS: Apple iPad and AT&T pricing, etc.

At 28 Jan 2010 20:34:52 -0700 Tom Harrington wrote:

> > "Kindle for iPhone" seemed like quite a coup before Apple had designs
> > on the
> > eBook business. I wonder if Apple will be as happy with the idea of
> > "Kindle
> > for iPad"? It's been assumed that the iPad will be compatible with
> > iPhone/iPod Touch software, so will iPhone eBook software be welcome
> > on the iPad? Or blocked as a violation of the "no duplicate
> > functionality" rules? This is the double-edged sword of "apps."
> > Apple attempts to tread the fine line between "internet appliance"
> > and "computer" with devices like the iPhone and now the iPad. It's
> > hard to open a device up to third-party apps like a computer, yet
> > try to contain a closed ecosystem like an appliance.

>
> I didn't realize this was what you meant. It's a fair question, and
> one supported by Apple's previous app-store decisions. I couldn't
> honestly say I expect them to allow it, given their history of app
> store rejections.



I find it fascinating, since this could be the first real schism in the
iP* ecosystem. As the product line fractures into devices with different
core feature sets, the concept of "duplicate functionality" could now
begin to vary by device for the first time.

To carry the "what if" further, it seems likely that Apple will add
iBooks support to iPhones and Touches as well when 3.2 (or whatever OS
revision supports the iPad) launches, creating a sort of "retroactive"
duplicate functionality paradox- does Apple "grandfather" existing eBook
software (Kindle, Stanza, etc.) but reject all future eBook apps? Or do
they introduce a "Genii clause" (eBook apps as a category have already
been "released from the bottle," and therefore aren't covered by the
duplicate functionality rules.) And, if the latter, does the Genii
clause apply to the iPad as well, or just the iPhone/Touch?

Just a few speculative mental excercises to fill the three months before
launch!






Reply With Quote
  #83 (permalink)  
Old 01-29-2010, 06:44 AM
Larry
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: NEWS: Apple iPad and AT&T pricing, etc.

Dennis Ferguson <dcferguson@pacbell.net> wrote in
news:slrnhm2dh2.5c.dcferguson@akit-ferguson.com:

> I can't quite figure out why the world's biggest iPhone just
> had to have the world's smallest SIM card. There might be
> an ongoing theme here, though. Unless I've missed something
> I noticed, for example, that if you go out and pay full price
> for an unlocked, carrier-free iPhone, and then go out and pay
> top dollar for a tethering data plan, you still don't get to
> tether your iPhone unless the carrier is one of those which Apple
> has graciously allowed to grease Apple's palm with kickbacks;
> with a non-iPhone carrier's SIM the tethering menus never seem
> to appear no matter what data plan you have and how much you paid
> for the phone. I guess picking a non-standard "standard" for the
> SIM, no doubt initially available only from special carriers with
> special Apple-approved data plans, is an even more effective method
> than just defeaturing the device to encourage you to do what Apple
> wants with your purchase, rather than what you'd like?
>
>


Just follow the MONEY! Apple/ATT had to come up with a way to thwart
iPhone owners from swapping their SIMs into their shiny new iToy MaxiPad
bypassing the ATTWS Box Office charges for TWO data accounts! So, Stevie
solved their problem by making MaxiPad's SIM slot NOT FIT ANY OTHER CARDS
OUT THERE!

iPhoners need to give the company a CLEAR MESSAGE that this is not
unnoticed and anti-customer ********. There's absolutely no other reason
for this atrocity and the atrocity the MaxiPad doesn't simply FIND THE
IPHONE ON BLUETOOTH when brought into range and CONNECT TO IT for data
service USERS ARE ALREADY PAYING FOR!

FCC needs to make some noise about DOUBLE CHARGING for data service for
Iphone customers. The time for TETHERING is NOW!

In government we used to call this DOUBLE DIPPING!

Reply With Quote
  #84 (permalink)  
Old 01-29-2010, 06:47 AM
Larry
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: NEWS: Apple iPad and AT&T pricing, etc.

nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote in news:280120100500288860%
nospam@nospam.invalid:

> if apple wanted to restrict it to apple-approved carriers, why would
> they make it unlocked at all? or did that not cross your mind?
>
>


They did lock it. It ONLY covers the ATTWS frequencies.....noone else.


Reply With Quote
  #85 (permalink)  
Old 01-29-2010, 06:58 AM
Larry
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: NEWS: Apple iPad and AT&T pricing, etc.

"iPad 3G another AT&T exclusive!" <vic.healey@gmail.com> wrote in
news:fa9380c9-b9b8-4d1e-8532-893b63c065b8@l30g2000yqb.googlegroups.com:

> * Divix and that other obsolete stuff you crave can't do those
> things.
>
>


You don't have real usenet service, do you?

75% of the webpages with content use FLASH....75%!

about the same % of the video content on usenet is DivX or XviD.

I've forwarded your comments to:
http://www.divx.com/en/win
so they can laugh at it, too.

http://www.divx.com/en/software/mac/divx
the MAC update now plays HD DivX. Give it a try!

The movies are Beautiful...and very compact.

Try Divx TV, too.

Reply With Quote
  #86 (permalink)  
Old 01-29-2010, 07:50 AM
nospam
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: NEWS: Apple iPad and AT&T pricing, etc.

In article <Xns9D0F1A35BEF0Cnoonehomecom@74.209.131.13>, Larry
<noone@home.com> wrote:

> No ePub support according to the news reports today.


what news reports are these? apple specifically said it uses epub.

Reply With Quote
  #87 (permalink)  
Old 01-29-2010, 07:50 AM
nospam
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: NEWS: Apple iPad and AT&T pricing, etc.

In article <Xns9D0F1B10CCF37noonehomecom@74.209.131.13>, Larry
<noone@home.com> wrote:

> Obviously, YES! There was no room for USB ports, firewire ports, SD or
> even microSD card slots that had to be an add-on dongle sold for more
> moolah, of course.


why in hell would it need firewire?

> They had so much space problems they couldn't even make
> the SD card reader a WRITER!


you don't know whether it writes or not.

> It only allows camera data to "IMPORT".
> Apparently, if you put your photos onto the maxiPad off your camera....you
> CAN'T GET THEM OFF THE MAXIPAD WHEN YOU GET HOME!


i would say you are an idiot, but that would give you far too much
credit.

Reply With Quote
  #88 (permalink)  
Old 01-29-2010, 07:50 AM
nospam
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: NEWS: Apple iPad and AT&T pricing, etc.

In article <Xns9D0F1C54B5D12noonehomecom@74.209.131.13>, Larry
<noone@home.com> wrote:

> > if apple wanted to restrict it to apple-approved carriers, why would
> > they make it unlocked at all? or did that not cross your mind?

>
> They did lock it.


it's unlocked.

> It ONLY covers the ATTWS frequencies.....noone else.


it will work on 2g, but who makes a chipset that covers *both* at&t and
t-mobile's 3g frequencies? do you know of *any* other phone that works
on both? needing to use two chipsets would add to the expense, which
would only give you something else about which to rant.

and t-mobile isn't the only other carrier either. go overseas and pop
in a sim and it will work there, even at 3g speeds.

Reply With Quote
  #89 (permalink)  
Old 01-29-2010, 07:50 AM
nospam
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: NEWS: Apple iPad and AT&T pricing, etc.

In article <Diw8n.10649$3n2.2322@newsfe01.iad>, Todd Allcock
<elecconnec@AnoOspamL.com> wrote:

> Well, unlike AT&T, T-Mo sells neither a metered internet plan, nor a la
> carte (per KB/M data, so selling anything other than an unlimited plan
> would probably require serious systemic changes in their billing system.
> Not worth it for the miniscule number of customers this product would
> bring to T-Mo.
>
> Plus, since SIM cards are easily swapped between devices, any low-ball
> iPad specific plan's SIM could easily be moved to other devices- even 3G
> devices. There isn't a separate 3G APN. Any compatible 3G device will
> get 3G service on any T-Mo data plan.


why can't they sim lock it to the device if it's ipad specific? why
can't they come up with a new plan for a new device?

> T-Mo has traditionally sold
> data inexpensively, to compensate for a lack of a 3G network, but has
> bent over backwards in the last year, since launching 3G, to rectify that
> situation! In addition, T-Mo has steadfastly avoided selling data to
> PAYG customers, with the exception of the Sidekick, which is probably a
> demographics issue (Sidekick customers tend to be young and have little to
> no credit history.)


i've heard rumblings that they're thinking about it.

> Even you can't believe a million people will be carrying a portfolio-
> sized tablet everywhere they go 3-6 months from now, can you?


analysts are claiming several million in its first year and i think
that's very conservative.

> I think
> this thing will sell extremely well- _for a tablet_, and perhaps even
> slightly dent the netbook market, but I suspect the majority will be sold
> without 3G.


i think a lot of people will buy the 3g version just in case they might
need it some time. the data plan has no contract so it doesn't really
cost that much more if it rarely gets used, and i can see where some
people might want to have it for occasional use.

> Ever use an iPhone on T-Mo? Surfing that "real web" with Safari over
> EDGE isn't pretty.


it's not that bad. a lot of apps are frugal with the data they pull.
hitting graphic intensive web pages sucks though.

Reply With Quote
  #90 (permalink)  
Old 01-29-2010, 08:10 AM
Todd Allcock
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: NEWS: Apple iPad and AT&T pricing, etc.

At 29 Jan 2010 07:34:34 +0000 Larry wrote:
> Todd Allcock <elecconnec@AnoOspamL.com> wrote in news:ZO98n.14507

$3W2.9050
> @newsfe14.iad:
>
> > At 27 Jan 2010 17:53:52 -0700 Michelle Steiner wrote:
> >
> >> Oh, by the way concerning your rant about eBooks: The iPad uses the
> >> ePub format, which is a free, open, and non-proprietary format.
> >> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EPUB>


> > I'll be interesting to see what Apple uses for DRM. If they use the
> > existing Adobe ADEPT system, like Sony, then iPad users could take
> > advantage of the wealth of public libraries who lend ePub books via

the
> > Overdive DRM system, which expire and become unreadable after the

lending
> > period is over.
> >
> > Of course, if iPad supports ADEPT, you'd also be able to purchase ePub
> > content outside of iBooks/Tunes, so I don't quite picture that
> > happening...

>
>
> No ePub support according to the news reports today.
>
> Google Adobe iPad and there's lots of chatter.



Just a nitpick- it supports the EPub format, but apparently will use a
different DRM scheme (not entirely unexpected!) than Adobe uses. That
doesn't change the underlying format, however.

I'm not blaming Apple (at least any more than anyone else)- everyone
wants to use their own scheme to lock users into their store, but in the
long run, this will slow the adoption of eBooks. Assuming iBooks takes
off (and there's no reason to believe it won't!) that will make four
major players in eBooks: Sony, B&N, Amazon and Apple, each with
incompatible DRM schemes and three competing file formats. While annoying,
it isn't a complete failure, since some portable devices, like many
mobile phones and netbook, can support multiple formats/schemes.


I'm curious to see if Apple makes iBooks cross-platform. B&N and Amazon
are in the book business- their eBook hardware is just a means to the end
of selling eBooks- they offer their respective eBook reading software for
various computers and mobile devices as well. If Apple limits iBooks to
iPads and iPhones (which one could argue is likely, given that this is
the company that sued Palm for engineering their Pre to connect to
iTunes, despite the possibility it'd increase iTunes content sales) then
I'd like iBooks to fail miserably. I like ebooks, and for ebooks to
florish, they have to be platform and device agnostic.



Reply With Quote
Reply


« Re: AT&T wireless forced me to have an Internet "data plan" (is that legal)? | Re: AT&T and Verizon to Carry =?windows-1252?Q?Apple=92s_Table?==?windows-1252?Q?t_=5BRUMOR=5D?= »
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
NEWS: Verizon and AT&T May Both Get Apple Tablet John Navas alt.cellular.cingular 824 08-28-2010 12:17 PM
NEWS: Verizon and AT&T May Both Get Apple Tablet John Navas alt.cellular.verizon 780 08-28-2010 12:17 PM
NEWS: Verizon and AT&T May Both Get Apple Tablet John Navas alt.cellular.attws 2467 08-28-2010 12:17 PM
NEWS: Verizon and AT&T May Both Get Apple Tablet John Navas alt.cellular.t-mobile 776 08-28-2010 12:17 PM
NEWS: Verizon and AT&T May Both Get Apple Tablet John Navas alt.internet.wireless 1865 08-28-2010 09:30 AM


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:55 PM.



Powered by vBulletin® Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45