NEWS: Verizon and AT&T May Both Get Apple Tablet

In article <poldy-B1BE1F.21365217032010@nothing.attdns.com>,
poldy <poldy@kfu.com> wrote:

> In article <4ba19fc7$0$1604$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net>,
> SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
>
> > Steve Fenwick wrote:
> >
> > > The same metrics show that Motorola¹s Droid launched to
> > > better-than-expected numbers, selling over one million units faster than
> > > the iPhone did when it was released in 2007. Flurry does note the Droid
> > > had the benefit of coming after the iPhone, a device that changed users¹
> > > perceptions about the capacity and capabilities of mobile devices.
> >
> > The Droid is also on a carrier with more subscribers, many of whom have
> > been waiting for a decent smart phone, so there was a lot of pent up
> > demand. But yes, a large part of the Droid's success is due to Apple
> > creating expectations of what a smart phone should be capable of.
> >
> > No other mobile phone manufacturer has Apple's marketing capability.
> > With iPhone you have a whole ecosystem of content, accessories, and
> > support. With Droid you get little of that. If Apple had a CDMA iPhone
> > they could sell another 20 million units, plus they wouldn't have to
> > worry about the problems they've had with AT&T's overloaded, underbuilt,
> > 3G network.
>
> First iPhone was also what, $600?

$499 for 4GB, $599 for 8GB (in June 2007).


> Then they lowered it to $400?

Currently at $99 for the 8GB 3G model; $199 to $299 for the 3GS with
16GB or 32GB.

All these Apple prices are with a 2 year contract.


> Droid on the other hand already seem to be doing two-for-one deals, get
> two Droids for $199 and contract.

According to Verizon's site this evening, the Motorola Droid phone is
$199 with a 2 year contract. 16GB pre-installed microSD card. The HTC
Drois Eris is $79 with 2 year contract, 8GB pre-installed. Both have the
2-for-1 deal. That should certainly accelerate the install rate.

Steve

--
steve <at> w0x0f <dot> com
"Life should not be a journey to the grave with the intention of
arriving safely in an attractive and well preserved body, but rather to
skid in sideways, chocolate in one hand, chip shot in the other, body thoroughly
used up, totally worn out and screaming "WOO HOO what a ride!"

In article <4ba19fc7$0$1604$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net>,
SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:

> Steve Fenwick wrote:
>
> > The same metrics show that Motorola¹s Droid launched to
> > better-than-expected numbers, selling over one million units faster than
> > the iPhone did when it was released in 2007. Flurry does note the Droid
> > had the benefit of coming after the iPhone, a device that changed users¹
> > perceptions about the capacity and capabilities of mobile devices.
>
> The Droid is also on a carrier with more subscribers, many of whom have
> been waiting for a decent smart phone, so there was a lot of pent up
> demand. But yes, a large part of the Droid's success is due to Apple
> creating expectations of what a smart phone should be capable of.
>
> No other mobile phone manufacturer has Apple's marketing capability.
> With iPhone you have a whole ecosystem of content, accessories, and
> support. With Droid you get little of that. If Apple had a CDMA iPhone
> they could sell another 20 million units, plus they wouldn't have to
> worry about the problems they've had with AT&T's overloaded, underbuilt,
> 3G network.

First iPhone was also what, $600?

Then they lowered it to $400?

Droid on the other hand already seem to be doing two-for-one deals, get
two Droids for $199 and contract.

Research in Motion's Blackberries have extended their lead over Apple's
iPhone as the top smartphone platform in the US.

During the same period - December 2009 through February 2010 - Google's
Android platform saw a surge of nearly 140 per cent to 9 per cent
overall, while Palm's share dove 25 per cent, down to 5.4 per cent.

Microsoft's mobile presence is not doing so hot, either, with a dip of
over 20 per cent to 15.1 per cent.

MORE:
<http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/04/07/smartphone_ownsership_stats/>

--
Best regards,
John <http:/navasgroup.com>

If the iPhone is really so impressive,
why do iFans keep making excuses for it?

is blackberry still in business? i thought they gave up over a year ago?

hum...

GSM iPhone May Be Going To Canada

Canadian carrier SaskTel is switching to GSM and building its 3G network
and says it's ready for Apple's next-gen iPhone.

Now that the reports and hoopla surrounding the iPad has died down,
there is scuttlebutt that an iPhone under development will be offered
for sale in northern Canada by Saskatchewan's SaskTel.

The interesting angle here is that SaskTel is moving from CDMA
infrastructure -- used by Verizon Wireless, for instance -- to a network
based on GSM, used by AT&T, for instance.

....

Several months ago, the Wall Street Journal quoted Verizon chairman and
CEO Ivan Seidenberg as saying: "Apple never had any intention of making
a CDMA" iPhone. At the time a miffed Seidenberg indicated that he
thought Apple's negotiations were meant to increase its negotiation
muscle over AT&T, which, of course, gained exclusive US rights...

[Directly contradicts silly claims by SMS, VerizonFanboi Steven Scharf.]

MORE:
<http://www.informationweek.com/news/mobility/3G/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=224400664>

After generating disappointing results in our tests last spring, AT&T’s
3G network is now the top performer in our 13-city tests, with download
speeds 67 percent faster than its competitors'.

Mark Sullivan, PCWorld
Feb 22, 2010 8:12 pm

MORE:
<http://www.pcworld.com/article/189592/atandt_roars_back_in_pcworlds_second_3g_wireless_p erformance_test.html>

[including San Francisco]

--
Best regards,
John <http:/navasgroup.com>

If the iPhone is really so impressive,
why do iFans keep making excuses for it?

Nonsense, both from Navas and that article. iPhone in no way is hastening
the death of CDMA 2000. Nor did SaskTel say that they are deploying a GSM
network.

Rather, the fact that just about every carrier is using LTE instead of
WiMax for 4G means that the Qualcomm-controlled fork of CDMA is dying.

GSM is dead, and was killed by CDMA. Nobody is deploying new GSM any
more. GSM is an archaic TDMA 2G system. Good bye and good riddance.

All 3G is CDMA based, whether UMTS (which the GSM world adopted) or EV-DO
(which the CDMA 2000 world adopted). The Canadian CDMA carriers are doing
dual UMTS/EV-DO 3G transition strategies (although clearly the push is for
UMTS). Telus has been well underway on this for months now, and
duplicating their CDMA footprint with UMTS (not GSM/UMTS).

Verizon is doing their transition at 4G, and presumably will duplicate
their CDMA footwith with LTE. What remains to be seen is if Verizon will
have dual mode CDMA/LTE phones, or force their customers to choose between
incompatible networks as the Canadian carriers are doing.

Verizon already has phones which are tri-mode CDMA/GSM/UMTS. I suspect
that they will offer CDMA/LTE and CDMA/GSM/UMTS/LTE phones.

Since 3G and 4G is all CDMA based, there is no longer any good reason to
have two incompatible system. Preserving Qualcomm's control does not
constitute a good reason. Hence death to WiMax.

iPhone already support UMTS, and has for the past two versions. A Verizon
iPhone would almost certainly be an LTE device. At this stage of the
game, it is crazy for Apple to produce an CDMA iPhone for the short period
of time before LTE networks are deployed.

-- Mark --

http://panda.com/mrc
Democracy is two wolves and a sheep deciding what to eat for lunch.
Liberty is a well-armed sheep contesting the vote.

On 20/04/10 2:55 PM, Mark Crispin wrote:
> Nonsense, both from Navas and that article. iPhone in no way is
> hastening the death of CDMA 2000. Nor did SaskTel say that they are
> deploying a GSM network.
>
> Rather, the fact that just about every carrier is using LTE instead of
> WiMax for 4G means that the Qualcomm-controlled fork of CDMA is dying.

Technically, LTE is not 4G. Also, while Qualcomm does not control LTE
like they do W-CDMA and CDMA2000, neither is LTE free from paying
Qualcomm royalites.

> GSM is dead, and was killed by CDMA. Nobody is deploying new GSM any
> more. GSM is an archaic TDMA 2G system. Good bye and good riddance.

This is true. The 3G system in GSM countries is W-CDMA. It's still CDMA,
and if you're using 3G for voice on AT&T then you're using a form of
CDMA, much to the disappointment of our favorite troll.

> Verizon is doing their transition at 4G, and presumably will duplicate
> their CDMA footwith with LTE. What remains to be seen is if Verizon will
> have dual mode CDMA/LTE phones, or force their customers to choose
> between incompatible networks as the Canadian carriers are doing.

Yes, it'll be interesting to see if the much anticipated iPhone for
Verizon is CDMA/LTE (if it really exists at all).

Mark Crispin <mrc@panda.com> wrote in
news:alpine.OSX.2.00.1004201428360.709@hsinghsing. panda.com:

> deployed.
>

None of this will make any difference as long as you get 5GB/month for $60.
It will only mean the netbooks will eat the 5GB is 2 hours instead of 6 and
you'll have nothing for the other 30 days, 22 hour, 9 minutes and 18
seconds the REST of the month.

Notice how NOTHING is said about UNLIMITED service on LTE or 4G....except
WiMax.

Only Cricket delivers unlimited data (at 600Kbps on EVDO Rev A throttled to
600Kbps) here in Charleston, SC.



--
Creationism is to science what storks are to obstetrics.

Larry

At 20 Apr 2010 10:42:03 -0700 John Navas wrote:
> After generating disappointing results in our tests last spring, AT&T’s
> 3G network is now the top performer in our 13-city tests, with download
> speeds 67 percent faster than its competitors'.
>
> Mark Sullivan, PCWorld
> Feb 22, 2010 8:12 pm


"And, this just in, April has been discovered to be two months after
February. Tune in for more details on this fast-breaking story in
June..."

On 20/04/10 2:55 PM, Mark Crispin wrote:

> iPhone already support UMTS, and has for the past two versions. A
> Verizon iPhone would almost certainly be an LTE device. At this stage of
> the game, it is crazy for Apple to produce an CDMA iPhone for the short
> period of time before LTE networks are deployed.

This is true. LTE is going to be deployed by Verizon in months (or even
weeks). But CDMA/LTE devices are a certainty, as it will take LTE at
least another year to be deployed at all of Verizon's cell sites. They
want to roll LTE out quickly because they made the decision to stop
upgrading their CDMA2000 network in terms of speed, while AT&T has been
upgrading their W-CDMA network as a stop-gap measure until they can roll
out LTE. This has given AT&T a speed advantage in the interim.

AT&T has already said that they're going to try to accelerate their LTE
rollout, trying to be only one year behind Verizon, rather than the two
years behind that they originally projected, but Verizon can gain a lot
of speed-sensitive customers in that one year.

On Wed, 21 Apr 2010, SMS posted:
> This is true. LTE is going to be deployed by Verizon in months (or even
> weeks).

Yes. The phone that I am looking for next will be a quad mode (LTE, CDMA,
UMTS, GSM) phone; and hopefully much more reliable than the BlackBerry
Storm.

> But CDMA/LTE devices are a certainty, as it will take LTE at least
> another year to be deployed at all of Verizon's cell sites.

I hope so. Telus in Canada has more or less deployed UMTS to all of their
CDMA sites, but has not offered any CDMA/UMTS devices. The result is that
customers have to choose between two non-interoperable networks. To make
things worth, Canada's northern territories (e.g., Yukon) are for the most
part CDMA-only.

Hopefully Verizon is taking lessons from Telus' botch.

> AT&T has already said that they're going to try to accelerate their LTE
> rollout, trying to be only one year behind Verizon, rather than the two years
> behind that they originally projected, but Verizon can gain a lot of
> speed-sensitive customers in that one year.

Especially since Verizon still has better coverage.

-- Mark --

http://panda.com/mrc
Democracy is two wolves and a sheep deciding what to eat for lunch.
Liberty is a well-armed sheep contesting the vote.

John Navas wrote:

>Research in Motion's Blackberries

Is the plural of the name Blackberry spelled Blackberries or
Blackberrys?

On 21/04/10 8:27 AM, Mark Crispin wrote:
> On Wed, 21 Apr 2010, SMS posted:
>> This is true. LTE is going to be deployed by Verizon in months (or
>> even weeks).
>
> Yes. The phone that I am looking for next will be a quad mode (LTE,
> CDMA, UMTS, GSM) phone; and hopefully much more reliable than the
> BlackBerry Storm.
>
>> But CDMA/LTE devices are a certainty, as it will take LTE at least
>> another year to be deployed at all of Verizon's cell sites.
>
> I hope so. Telus in Canada has more or less deployed UMTS to all of
> their CDMA sites, but has not offered any CDMA/UMTS devices. The result
> is that customers have to choose between two non-interoperable networks.
> To make things worth, Canada's northern territories (e.g., Yukon) are
> for the most part CDMA-only.

Difficult to use anything but CDMA (or AMPS) in areas that large and
sparsely populated.

>> AT&T has already said that they're going to try to accelerate their
>> LTE rollout, trying to be only one year behind Verizon, rather than
>> the two years behind that they originally projected, but Verizon can
>> gain a lot of speed-sensitive customers in that one year.
>
> Especially since Verizon still has better coverage.

Exactly. But now AT&T has bragging rights in terms of 3G data rates in
the areas that they actually have 3G coverage, until Verizon gets their
LTE deployed. It doesn't look like Verizon wants to spend any money on
speeding up their CDMA 3G coverage. The only thing saving Verizon right
now is that their coverage, both 3G and voice, is so much better than
AT&T that they enjoy customer loyalty despite the way they behave badly
in so many other ways. Verizon has adopted the oil company law of supply
and demand--'we have all the supply, so we can demand whatever the f$%k
we want.' Of course many people don't care all that much about coverage
outside of major metropolitan areas, so Verizon's advantage in this
regard hasn't enabled them to significantly increase their market share.

Apple's iPhone is the Nick Clegg of smartphones: attractive,
media-savvy, and firmly in third place when matched up against its
more-experienced rivals.

The top worldwide smartphone manufacturer - by a hefty margin - remains
neither Apple nor Research in Motion but Nokia, according to the IDC's
latest Worldwide Quarterly Mobile Phone Tracker report.

Well, to be completely accurate, the report surveyed what IDC insists on
calling "converged mobile devices," but what every other sentient being
on the planet calls smartphones.

In a nutshell, the report places Nokia's worldwide smartphone market
share at 39.3 per cent, RIM's at 19.4, and Apple's at 16.1, all for the
first calendar quarter of 2010. These numbers differ somewhat from those
announced last week by Strategy Analytics, but not enough to cause
cheering in Cupertino or weeping in Espoo, Finland.

MORE: <http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/05/07/idc_smartphone_numbers/>

John Navas <spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote in
news:02jdu51ep5hpqgjnkt4a4qmrnovlu284nc@navasgroup .com:

> Apple's iPhone is the Nick Clegg of smartphones: attractive,
> media-savvy, and firmly in third place when matched up against its
> more-experienced rivals.
>
> The top worldwide smartphone manufacturer - by a hefty margin -
remains
> neither Apple nor Research in Motion but Nokia, according to the IDC's
> latest Worldwide Quarterly Mobile Phone Tracker report.
>
> Well, to be completely accurate, the report surveyed what IDC insists
on
> calling "converged mobile devices," but what every other sentient
being
> on the planet calls smartphones.
>
> In a nutshell, the report places Nokia's worldwide smartphone market
> share at 39.3 per cent, RIM's at 19.4, and Apple's at 16.1, all for
the
> first calendar quarter of 2010. These numbers differ somewhat from
those
> announced last week by Strategy Analytics, but not enough to cause
> cheering in Cupertino or weeping in Espoo, Finland.
>
> MORE:
<http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/05/07/idc_smartphone_numbers/>
>

John, have you taken a look at the Nokia N8 coming out?

http://events.nokia.com/NokiaN8/

http://europe.nokia.com/find-products/devices/nokia-n8

12 users who enter the winning app IDEAs will be flown to a big Nokia
event in London. Some celebs are judging the contest....

12 MP camera with a real xenon flash and HD 720p video....in a phone?!

Love the cool way the camera zooms in and out....by moving it towards
and away from the subject....

There's also a webcam on the screen side for online video cam.

48GB with a 32GB microSDHC card in it. None of that Crapple
hobbling.... Free mapping for 70 countries.
Symbian 3 OS...first one.

No wonder they're number ONE.



--
Creationism is to science what storks are to obstetrics.

Larry

On Mon, 10 May 2010 04:18:20 +0000, Larry <noone@home.com> wrote in
<Xns9D7431BFE70Fnoonehomecom@74.209.131.13>:

>John, have you taken a look at the Nokia N8 coming out?
>http://events.nokia.com/NokiaN8/
>http://europe.nokia.com/find-products/devices/nokia-n8

I have. My take:
* Still vaporware
* Great potential design and hardware
* Hobbled by Symbian OS
* Would love to see an Android version

>12 users who enter the winning app IDEAs will be flown to a big Nokia
>event in London. Some celebs are judging the contest....
>
>12 MP camera with a real xenon flash and HD 720p video....in a phone?!
>
>Love the cool way the camera zooms in and out....by moving it towards
>and away from the subject....
>
>There's also a webcam on the screen side for online video cam.
>
>48GB with a 32GB microSDHC card in it. None of that Crapple
>hobbling.... Free mapping for 70 countries.
>Symbian 3 OS...first one.
>
>No wonder they're number ONE.

--
Best regards, FAQ for Wireless Internet: <http://wireless.navas.us>
John FAQ for Wi-Fi: <http://wireless.navas.us/wiki/Wi-Fi>
Wi-Fi How To: <http://wireless.navas.us/wiki/Wi-Fi_HowTo>
Fixes to Wi-Fi Problems: <http://wireless.navas.us/wiki/Wi-Fi_Fixes>

Whether you root for Google or Apple, it's a heck of a horse race as
Android beat the iPhone in first quarter U.S. sales, according to the
NPD Group.

Android sales accounted for 28 percent of smartphone sales last quarter,
NPD reports. That puts Android ahead of the iPhone's 21 percent, and
within striking distance of Research in Motion's BlackBerry, which took
36 percent.

It's worth noting that while Android had a great quarter, it still lags
behind RIM, Apple and even Windows Mobile for total market share,
according to recent statistics from ComScore. Google's operating system
had 9 percent of the market as of February 2010, compared with the
iPhone's 25.4 percent, so Android won't catch up for a while, if at all.

Still, as my colleague JR Raphael noted when ComScore reported its
numbers, Android's growth is striking. Not only did Android outsell the
iPhone, but it's the only smartphone OS whose unit share grew since the
previous quarter. The iPhone, meanwhile, is flat, while Windows Mobile,
BlackBerry and WebOS quarterly sales share is in decline. If this trend
continues, Android will catch up to its competitors for total market
share in a hurry.

MORE:
<http://www.pcworld.com/article/195958/android_outsells_apple_iphone_at_last_says_npd.htm l>

....

"It looks like Android is going to be either the number one or number
two player," the executive told the crowd.

Schmidt also suggested that his estimate "might be quite low," according
to "the blogosphere." At present, there are 34 different smartphones
running the OS in 49 countries.

MORE: <http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2363806,00.asp>

In article <g7ltu5p7ech32vbcki9v1cpq2ck2saa36q@navasgroup.com >, John
Navas <spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote:

> MORE: <http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2363806,00.asp>

If you need some more concrete numbers, how about this one: According
to Google's CEO, Eric Schmidt, more than 65,000 Android handsets are
shipped every day.

of course he doesn't mention how many handsets *other* companies ship.

apple ships well over twice that per day, based on their recent sales
reports. that number will no doubt increase when the next iphone is
released, possibly by quite a bit, depending on whether some rumours
turn out to be true.

<http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/8685839.stm>

On 5/10/10 12:18 AM, Larry wrote:
> John Navas<spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote in
> news:02jdu51ep5hpqgjnkt4a4qmrnovlu284nc@navasgroup .com:
>
>> Apple's iPhone is the Nick Clegg of smartphones: attractive,
>> media-savvy, and firmly in third place when matched up against its
>> more-experienced rivals.
>>
>> The top worldwide smartphone manufacturer - by a hefty margin -
> remains
>> neither Apple nor Research in Motion but Nokia, according to the IDC's
>> latest Worldwide Quarterly Mobile Phone Tracker report.
>>
>> Well, to be completely accurate, the report surveyed what IDC insists
> on
>> calling "converged mobile devices," but what every other sentient
> being
>> on the planet calls smartphones.
>>
>> In a nutshell, the report places Nokia's worldwide smartphone market
>> share at 39.3 per cent, RIM's at 19.4, and Apple's at 16.1, all for
> the
>> first calendar quarter of 2010. These numbers differ somewhat from
> those
>> announced last week by Strategy Analytics, but not enough to cause
>> cheering in Cupertino or weeping in Espoo, Finland.
>>
>> MORE:
> <http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/05/07/idc_smartphone_numbers/>
>>
>
> John, have you taken a look at the Nokia N8 coming out?
>
> http://events.nokia.com/NokiaN8/
>
> http://europe.nokia.com/find-products/devices/nokia-n8
>
> 12 users who enter the winning app IDEAs will be flown to a big Nokia
> event in London. Some celebs are judging the contest....
>
> 12 MP camera with a real xenon flash and HD 720p video....in a phone?!
>
> Love the cool way the camera zooms in and out....by moving it towards
> and away from the subject....
>
> There's also a webcam on the screen side for online video cam.
>
> 48GB with a 32GB microSDHC card in it. None of that Crapple
> hobbling.... Free mapping for 70 countries.
> Symbian 3 OS...first one.
>
> No wonder they're number ONE.
>
>
>


I'd be happier if the makers of these fancy phones would concentrate on
making the *phones" better.

I don't give a damn about having a high megapixel camera in a phone.
Either my even higher megapixel full frame D-SLR or my lower megapixel
pocket camera will outshoot it.

Tunes? My iPOD does better, and for three times the amount of time on a
battery charge. Plus, if I listen via my iPod, my cell phone still has
its battery life for...phone calls.

I do use my cell's internet capabilities to check my POP email accounts.
In fact, that's the major reason why I got an HTC Incredible.

Movies? Do I want to watch a movie on our 50+ inch HD tv set or on my
cell phone? Tough call. :>)

In article <60o2v5hmdrmkc61mgf7qrn3g4u110ulj3l@navasgroup.com >, John
Navas <spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote:

> <http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/8685839.stm>

actually it's not so clear cut, plus a study that received funding from
the cellphone industry is immediately suspect.

<http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/news/...hone-cancer-st
udy-to-date-clarifies-little.ars>

In news:170520101618411867%nospam@nospam.invalid nospam
<nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:

> In article <60o2v5hmdrmkc61mgf7qrn3g4u110ulj3l@navasgroup.com >, John
> Navas <spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>
>> <http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/8685839.stm>
>
> actually it's not so clear cut, plus a study that received funding
> from the cellphone industry is immediately suspect.

Results from any source should always be suspect.

That's why the process, raw data and results are published or made
available; the data can be scrutinized and the tests can be performed
again by others.

><http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/news/...hone-cancer-st
> udy-to-date-clarifies-little.ars>

--
Bert Hyman St. Paul, MN bert@iphouse.com

Harry <naled24511@mypacks.net> wrote in news:85d6scFlpgU1
@mid.individual.net:

> Tunes? My iPOD does better, and for three times the amount of time on a
> battery charge. Plus, if I listen via my iPod, my cell phone still has
> its battery life for...phone calls.
>

No it doesn't. I load up a microSDHC with new tunes using the ultra-
complex Windows Explorer before I venture out and plug it into the
appropriate slot on my Motorola ROKR Z6m sellphone. The phone will play
until I can't stand it or get bored with it all day and still make phone
calls long after I get home before bedtime recharging on my nightstand.

What's better is the phone and player at interconnected. If I push the
phone button on the Motorola S9HD bluetooth stereo headset, the music
player stops as I talk to the phone to let it know who I want to call or
what number if it's not in the list. Once the call ends, the music simply
resumes from where it left off with no input from me, at all.

The 2GB SD cards, and I have several for different moods, hot swap in a
heartbeat giving the little phone unlimited storage. Nothing Apple makes
can compare to this simple phone and great sounding BT headset. Try it
sometimes, before drinking the reality distortion koolaid.

The phone would do email, but I'm always within easy reach of my netbook on
a Cricket aircard. I'm a stock daytrader so need market access more than
any phone could offer. It's gambling, I know, but we win more than we
lose.

I hardly carry an MP3 player much any more. Mine are old and don't have BT
unless I plug in the Sony BT stereo transmitter (BT-10) but that's too much
trouble....



--
Creationism is to science what storks are to obstetrics.

Larry

"nospam" <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote in message
news:170520101618411867%nospam@nospam.invalid...
> In article <60o2v5hmdrmkc61mgf7qrn3g4u110ulj3l@navasgroup.com >, John
> Navas <spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>
>> <http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/8685839.stm>
>
> actually it's not so clear cut, plus a study that received funding from
> the cellphone industry is immediately suspect.
>
> <http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/news/...hone-cancer-st
> udy-to-date-clarifies-little.ars>

That said I was involved at the time of the original studies funded by the
industry and the industry was very up front and clear that the work should
be above reproach with clear protocols to see that they were.

I don't know what's happened since them but from my POV all studies are
suspect as you get what you inspect not what you expect.

On Mon, 17 May 2010 21:52:41 +0000, Larry <noone@home.com> wrote in
<Xns9D7BB5DE3F7C6noonehomecom@74.209.131.13>:

>Harry <naled24511@mypacks.net> wrote in news:85d6scFlpgU1
>@mid.individual.net:
>
>> Tunes? My iPOD does better, and for three times the amount of time on a
>> battery charge. Plus, if I listen via my iPod, my cell phone still has
>> its battery life for...phone calls.
>
>No it doesn't. I load up a microSDHC with new tunes using the ultra-
>complex Windows Explorer before I venture out and plug it into the
>appropriate slot on my Motorola ROKR Z6m sellphone. The phone will play
>until I can't stand it or get bored with it all day and still make phone
>calls long after I get home before bedtime recharging on my nightstand.
>
>What's better is the phone and player at interconnected. If I push the
>phone button on the Motorola S9HD bluetooth stereo headset, the music
>player stops as I talk to the phone to let it know who I want to call or
>what number if it's not in the list. Once the call ends, the music simply
>resumes from where it left off with no input from me, at all.

Likewise with my Android mobile (T-Mobile myTouch 3G 3.5mm Jack, aka HTC
Magic), and likewise when streaming Pandora, Internet radio, or Google
Listen (podcasts), which I do at least as often as my recorded music.

>The 2GB SD cards, and I have several for different moods, hot swap in a
>heartbeat giving the little phone unlimited storage.

The 16GB microSDHC hard in my Android mobile is more than big enough to
hold music for all my moods, with room to spare for video (including
full length movies).

>Nothing Apple makes
>can compare to this simple phone and great sounding BT headset. Try it
>sometimes, before drinking the reality distortion koolaid.

Amen.

>The phone would do email, but I'm always within easy reach of my netbook on
>a Cricket aircard.

Tight integration with Gmail makes email on my Android mobile usually
better for me than using a portable computer.

>I hardly carry an MP3 player much any more. Mine are old and don't have BT
>unless I plug in the Sony BT stereo transmitter (BT-10) but that's too much
>trouble....

I haven't used an MP3 player in years, see no point in carrying another
device, especially one that's unnecessary.

--
Best regards,
John <http:/navasgroup.com>

If the iPhone is really so impressive,
why do iFans keep making excuses for it?

On Tue, 20 Apr 2010 16:40:54 -0700, SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com>
wrote in <4bce3b82$0$1635$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net>:

>On 20/04/10 2:55 PM, Mark Crispin wrote:
>> Nonsense, both from Navas and that article. iPhone in no way is
>> hastening the death of CDMA 2000. Nor did SaskTel say that they are
>> deploying a GSM network.
>>
>> Rather, the fact that just about every carrier is using LTE instead of
>> WiMax for 4G means that the Qualcomm-controlled fork of CDMA is dying.
>
>Technically, LTE is not 4G.

Another Silly and Meaningless Quibble, but of course that's your stock
in trade. Carriers going to LTE will most likely continue to LTE
Advanced, which is compatible with LTE, and expected to be IMT-Advanced
and ITU standard.

>Also, while Qualcomm does not control LTE
>like they do W-CDMA and CDMA2000, neither is LTE free from paying
>Qualcomm royalites.

Nor is Qualcomm free from paying royalties to others.

>> GSM is dead, and was killed by CDMA. Nobody is deploying new GSM any
>> more. GSM is an archaic TDMA 2G system. Good bye and good riddance.
>
>This is true. The 3G system in GSM countries is W-CDMA. It's still CDMA,
>and if you're using 3G for voice on AT&T then you're using a form of
>CDMA, much to the disappointment of our favorite troll.

Nope. And UMB (aks EV-DO Rev C) has been abandoned, making you look
foolish yet again.

>> Verizon is doing their transition at 4G, and presumably will duplicate
>> their CDMA footwith with LTE. What remains to be seen is if Verizon will
>> have dual mode CDMA/LTE phones, or force their customers to choose
>> between incompatible networks as the Canadian carriers are doing.
>
>Yes, it'll be interesting to see if the much anticipated iPhone for
>Verizon is CDMA/LTE (if it really exists at all).

Still clutching at that straw? You are too funny!

--
Best regards,
John <http:/navasgroup.com>

"A little learning is a dangerous thing." -Alexander Pope
"It is better to sit in silence and appear ignorant,
than to open your mouth and remove all doubt." -Mark Twain
"Being ignorant is not so much a shame, as being unwilling to learn."
-Benjamin Franklin

On Wed, 21 Apr 2010 07:38:22 -0700, SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com>
wrote in <4bcf0ddb$0$1619$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net>:

>On 20/04/10 2:55 PM, Mark Crispin wrote:
>
>> iPhone already support UMTS, and has for the past two versions. A
>> Verizon iPhone would almost certainly be an LTE device. At this stage of
>> the game, it is crazy for Apple to produce an CDMA iPhone for the short
>> period of time before LTE networks are deployed.
>
>This is true. LTE is going to be deployed by Verizon in months (or even
>weeks).

Please promise to hold your breath.

>But CDMA/LTE devices are a certainty, as it will take LTE at
>least another year to be deployed at all of Verizon's cell sites.

CDMA is not LTE.
CDMA2000 (EV-DO Rev C) is dead.
3GPP won.
Get over it.

>[SNIP usual anti-AT&T BS]

--
Best regards,
John <http:/navasgroup.com>

If the iPhone is really so impressive,
why do iFans keep making excuses for it?

On Wed, 21 Apr 2010 08:27:59 -0700, Mark Crispin <mrc@Panda.COM> wrote
in <alpine.OSX.2.00.1004210819080.709@hsinghsing.pand a.com>:

>On Wed, 21 Apr 2010, SMS posted:
>> This is true. LTE is going to be deployed by Verizon in months (or even
>> weeks).
>
>Yes. The phone that I am looking for next will be a quad mode (LTE, CDMA,
>UMTS, GSM) phone; and hopefully much more reliable than the BlackBerry
>Storm.

Unlikely unless and until soft radios become a reality,
which isn't likely anytime soon.

>> AT&T has already said that they're going to try to accelerate their LTE
>> rollout, trying to be only one year behind Verizon, rather than the two years
>> behind that they originally projected, but Verizon can gain a lot of
>> speed-sensitive customers in that one year.
>
>Especially since Verizon still has better coverage.

Not true.

--
Best regards,
John <http:/navasgroup.com>

If the iPhone is really so impressive,
why do iFans keep making excuses for it?