According to researcher Piper Jaffray, it polled 258 mobile phone
users in MINNEAPOLIS, and only 20 PERCENT OF THEM SAID THE IPHONE 4'S
ANTENNA WAS THE REASON WHY THEY WOULDN'T BUY ONE. THAT'S NOT
INCONSEQUENTIAL, but when it's AT&T that is turning mobile phone
consumers away in droves, Apple's exclusive U.S. iPhone carrier is
becoming that much more a liability.
Piper Jaffray analysts noted that three times the number of survey
respondents who complained about the iPhone 4's antenna complained
about the iPhone not being on Verizon. While the antenna
issue is "removing upside potential," Piper Jaffray noted, "Verizon
is actually the most significant factor limiting demand."
Piper Jaffray also reported that 38 PERCENT OF ITS POLLED USERS WERE
VERIZON CUSTOMERS, and 31 percent were AT&T customers. Forty percent
of them considered an iPhone, while 29 percent have considered an
Android device.
THE SURVEY OBVIOUSLY REPRESENTS A TINY FRACTION OF THE OVERALL MOBILE
PHONE CONSUMER POPULATION ...
[emphasis added]
--
John
If the iPhone and iPad are really so impressive,
then why do iFans keep making excuses for them?
Re: "AT&T, Not Antenna, Is Biggest iPhone Turn-Off"
On 9/9/2010 9:41 AM, Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
> In article<4c88e4b8$0$1663$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net>,
> SMS<scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
>
>> "http://www.crn.com/news/client-devices/227400008/at-t-not-antenna-is-biggest-
>> iphone-turn-off-study.htm"
>
> AT&T is in fact the biggest iPhone turnoff in my world.
>
> I've been AT&T-free for a few years now. I smile when they send my junk
> mail ("come back to us!") that I get to throw away, knowing that I'm
> costing them money every time.
Ten or fifteen years ago most people didn't understand that the carrier
you chose could make such a big difference in coverage and quality of
service.
Now there is no shortage of surveys, tests, and studies that clearly
shows that there are in fact big differences. Since nearly everyone now
has a cell phone, there are also a lot more people to ask about coverage
and quality.
Apple's losing market share as Android soars in popularity. Now even
when the iPhone finally arrives at other carriers those that wanted it
will be in two year contracts with their Android device. Verizon's
already announced end-of-life dates for relatively recent handsets as
they launch LTE. Any iPhone for Verizon will be a LTE/CDMA device. Or
Apple could do an LTE/CDMA/GSM handset and really be proactive.
Re: "AT&T, Not Antenna, Is Biggest iPhone Turn-Off"
On Thu, 09 Sep 2010 10:05:40 -0700, in
<4c8913ec$0$1657$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net>, SMS
<scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
>On 9/9/2010 9:41 AM, Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
>> In article<4c88e4b8$0$1663$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net>,
>> SMS<scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> "http://www.crn.com/news/client-devices/227400008/at-t-not-antenna-is-biggest-
>>> iphone-turn-off-study.htm"
>>
>> AT&T is in fact the biggest iPhone turnoff in my world.
>>
>> I've been AT&T-free for a few years now. I smile when they send my junk
>> mail ("come back to us!") that I get to throw away, knowing that I'm
>> costing them money every time.
>
>Ten or fifteen years ago most people didn't understand that the carrier
>you chose could make such a big difference in coverage and quality of
>service.
>
>Now there is no shortage of surveys, tests, and studies that clearly
>shows that there are in fact big differences. Since nearly everyone now
>has a cell phone, there are also a lot more people to ask about coverage
>and quality.
Wrong again(tm):
What surveys actually show is that differences are relatively small, and
that all major carriers now generally have good coverage in the areas
most people care about.
--
John
"Usenet is like a herd of performing elephants with diarrhea - massive,
difficult to redirect, awe inspiring, entertaining, and a source of mind
boggling amounts of excrement when you least expect it." --Gene Spafford
Re: "AT&T, Not Antenna, Is Biggest iPhone Turn-Off"
"SMS" <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote in message
news:4c88e4b8$0$1663$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net...
> "http://www.crn.com/news/client-devices/227400008/at-t-not-antenna-is-biggest-iphone-turn-off-study.htm"
Hmmm, for a guy who claims to trim alt.cellular.cingular from all crossposts
because "Cingular no longer exists," rather than to upset a certain regular
poster, don't you find it disingenuous to include the completely abandoned
"alt.cellular.gsm.carriers.voicestream"- which refers to a carrier's former
name that's been unused far longer than "Cingular"?
Re: "AT&T, Not Antenna, Is Biggest iPhone Turn-Off"
In article <cE9io.43952$LL1.42119@newsfe24.iad>, elecconnec@AnoOspamL.com says...
>
> "SMS" <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote in message
> news:4c88e4b8$0$1663$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net...
> > "http://www.crn.com/news/client-devices/227400008/at-t-not-antenna-is-biggest-iphone-turn-off-study.htm"
>
> Hmmm, for a guy who claims to trim alt.cellular.cingular from all crossposts
> because "Cingular no longer exists," rather than to upset a certain regular
> poster, don't you find it disingenuous to include the completely abandoned
> "alt.cellular.gsm.carriers.voicestream"- which refers to a carrier's former
> name that's been unused far longer than "Cingular"?
>
>
Yeah. That newsgroup's been abandoned forever. alt.cellular.t-mobile, my
friend.
Re: "AT&T, Not Antenna, Is Biggest iPhone Turn-Off"
On 9/9/2010 11:25 AM, Todd Allcock wrote:
>
>
> "SMS" <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote in message
> news:4c88e4b8$0$1663$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net...
>> "http://www.crn.com/news/client-devices/227400008/at-t-not-antenna-is-biggest-iphone-turn-off-study.htm"
>>
>
> Hmmm, for a guy who claims to trim alt.cellular.cingular from all
> crossposts because "Cingular no longer exists," rather than to upset a
> certain regular poster, don't you find it disingenuous to include the
> completely abandoned "alt.cellular.gsm.carriers.voicestream"- which
> refers to a carrier's former name that's been unused far longer than
> "Cingular"?
LOL, just wanted to see if our friend was paying attention!
> > Hmmm, for a guy who claims to trim alt.cellular.cingular from all
> > crossposts because "Cingular no longer exists," rather than to upset a
> > certain regular poster, don't you find it disingenuous to include the
> > completely abandoned "alt.cellular.gsm.carriers.voicestream"- which
> > refers to a carrier's former name that's been unused far longer than
> > "Cingular"?
>
> LOL, just wanted to see if our friend was paying attention!
Re: "AT&T, Not Antenna, Is Biggest iPhone Turn-Off"
On 9/9/2010 5:34 PM, nospam wrote:
> In article<b05i86d2j0flr850ul0j9mtdoimqfrbe4v@4ax.com >, John Navas
> <spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>
>>> Now there is no shortage of surveys, tests, and studies that clearly
>>> shows that there are in fact big differences. Since nearly everyone now
>>> has a cell phone, there are also a lot more people to ask about coverage
>>> and quality.
>>
>> Wrong again(tm):
>> What surveys actually show is that differences are relatively small, and
>> that all major carriers now generally have good coverage in the areas
>> most people care about.
>
> wrong.
>
> surveys show that the differences are actually quite large. here's one
> that came out today:
>
> <http://www.zdnet.com/blog/btl/wirele...rs-and-thats-b
> ad-news-for-at-t-good-for-verizon-sprint/39006>
>
> in the east, verizon scores 8 while t-mobile scores 23 problems per 100
> calls, roughly three times as many. that's not what one would call
> 'relatively small.'
>
> in the southeast, it's a 3 way tie between verizon, sprint and
> t-mobile. at&t comfortably in last place.
JWOC®, but the dropped call rates often need to be viewed in context. I
can say from experience, and without hesitation, that in many parts of
the Bay Area where I live, T-Mobile would absolutely have the fewest
dropped calls even though they are rated much worse than Verizon for the
region. The reason is clear from looking at T-Mobile's own coverage maps
on their web site--in order to drop a call you first have to be able to
make a call. AT&T, despite its very poor ratings in the J.D. Power
survey, has coverage that would enable you to make calls in a lot more
areas, and hence you could drop calls in a lot more places as well.
It's surprising how poorly AT&T did in the southest region which
includes metro areas where they own both the A&B side of the 800 MHz
spectrum.
Thank goodness they used a very big sample size, (26,595) so our
favorite troll at least won't be complaining about the statistical
validity of the survey.
Re: "AT&T, Not Antenna, Is Biggest iPhone Turn-Off"
In article <b05i86d2j0flr850ul0j9mtdoimqfrbe4v@4ax.com>, John Navas
<spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote:
> >Now there is no shortage of surveys, tests, and studies that clearly
> >shows that there are in fact big differences. Since nearly everyone now
> >has a cell phone, there are also a lot more people to ask about coverage
> >and quality.
>
> Wrong again(tm):
> What surveys actually show is that differences are relatively small, and
> that all major carriers now generally have good coverage in the areas
> most people care about.
wrong.
surveys show that the differences are actually quite large. here's one
that came out today:
in the east, verizon scores 8 while t-mobile scores 23 problems per 100
calls, roughly three times as many. that's not what one would call
'relatively small.'
in the southeast, it's a 3 way tie between verizon, sprint and
t-mobile. at&t comfortably in last place.
Re: "AT&T, Not Antenna, Is Biggest iPhone Turn-Off"
On Thu, 09 Sep 2010 16:56:15 -0700, in
<4c897428$0$1614$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net>, SMS
<scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
>On 9/9/2010 5:34 PM, nospam wrote:
>> In article<b05i86d2j0flr850ul0j9mtdoimqfrbe4v@4ax.com >, John Navas
>> <spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>>
>>>> Now there is no shortage of surveys, tests, and studies that clearly
>>>> shows that there are in fact big differences. Since nearly everyone now
>>>> has a cell phone, there are also a lot more people to ask about coverage
>>>> and quality.
>>>
>>> Wrong again(tm):
>>> What surveys actually show is that differences are relatively small, and
>>> that all major carriers now generally have good coverage in the areas
>>> most people care about.
>>
>> wrong.
>>
>> surveys show that the differences are actually quite large. here's one
>> that came out today:
>>
>> <http://www.zdnet.com/blog/btl/wirele...rs-and-thats-b
>> ad-news-for-at-t-good-for-verizon-sprint/39006>
>>
>> in the east, verizon scores 8 while t-mobile scores 23 problems per 100
>> calls, roughly three times as many. that's not what one would call
>> 'relatively small.'
>>
>> in the southeast, it's a 3 way tie between verizon, sprint and
>> t-mobile. at&t comfortably in last place.
>
>JWOC®, but the dropped call rates often need to be viewed in context. I
>can say from experience, and without hesitation, that in many parts of
>the Bay Area where I live, T-Mobile would absolutely have the fewest
>dropped calls even though they are rated much worse than Verizon for the
>region.
In your imagination I guess, since you don't actually use it.
>The reason is clear from looking at T-Mobile's own coverage maps
>on their web site--in order to drop a call you first have to be able to
>make a call. AT&T, despite its very poor ratings in the J.D. Power
>survey, has coverage that would enable you to make calls in a lot more
>areas, and hence you could drop calls in a lot more places as well.
Wrong again(tm):
T-Mobile actually has good coverage in the greater Bay Area, including
excellent 3G speeds.
>Thank goodness they used a very big sample size, (26,595) so our
>favorite troll at least won't be complaining about the statistical
>validity of the survey.
Wrong again(tm):
Margin of error is comparable to differences between carriers, so no
valid comparisons can be made, as I've explained numerous times before.
--
John
"Usenet is like a herd of performing elephants with diarrhea - massive,
difficult to redirect, awe inspiring, entertaining, and a source of mind
boggling amounts of excrement when you least expect it." --Gene Spafford
"AT&T, Not Antenna, Is Biggest iPhone Turn-Off" 
Linear Mode
