Verizon CTO says that LTE launch is looking better each day
1. herbiederb posted on 20 Oct 2010, 01:45 0
I think its great that VZW is quietly working in the background on this and not being to flashy like Sprint. Cant wait for them to flip the switch ON and surprise everyone with 4G later this year. GO VZW!
14. sinfulta posted on 03 Mar 2010, 01:12 0
That message is kind of skewed. What Tony Melone actually said in the interview, )as I was there listening to the press with Qualcomm) to Network World" and to into-mobile blog was that they would have and Overlay of it's 3G network by 2013. Not what phone arena posted as "Begin to execute a complete overlay of its 3G network in 2013". He said: We will completely overlay our current 3G network by 2013. Funny how a little conversation like that can get skewed in an interview. Did anyone catch it or get the recording of it and post it somewhere? I can't find it to link it for you guys. But if I do find it or ask some co-workers if they have a copy, then I'll post to youtube.
16. Mateo8326 posted on 03 Mar 2010, 09:04 0
ATT doing the same thing except they are announcing it on website like this article. so ATT is pretty much is in the backgroundas well, Sprint commerical its, verizon put out articles about it, and ATT.......... has everyone thinking that they are behind lol
17. phoneguy posted on 03 Mar 2010, 11:07 0
Not being flashy like Sprint???? Sprint has the product to market and there is nothing flashy about advertising what already exists. The Verizon people are telling people that LTE is the future and that WIMAX is inferior. Blah Blah Blah. We operate on 2 standards now between CDMA and GSM and it works just fine, there is room for two technologies, not to mention WIMAX is commecially deployed in many global markets. Verizon is behind the scenes because they don't have it yet. When they launch then we will see who is calling who flashy. BTW these companies care about one thing, their bottom line. Nothing more, so if you think they really "care" about their customers you are dead wrong, do you think they are doing right by their customers by strong arming them into data plans just to get a nice device? I have heard it all, "if you don't want to connect to the internet then don't get a cool phone". Truth be told, there alot of practical uses of a windows mobile phone that don't require the fucking internet. I am done ranting.
21. rimwireless posted on 03 Mar 2010, 11:16 0
You are a dumb ass. Thats like saying I want a blackberry but no email. Thats what a blackberry is for. email. So if you do not want to pay for a data plan then you dont need a windows phone. And if you dont have customers then you dont have a job. So thats why vzw att ect strive for great customer service because with out them they would not be where they are today. We all know that sprint does not care about there customer thats why hey are in hell where they belong.
23. DonLouie posted on 03 Mar 2010, 13:39 0
We all know vzw only cares about how much money can be extracted with all the stupid data requirements and huge ETF, Sprint seems to be looking out for there subs but the blind loyalty to vzw clouds the view because of some perceived view no carrier can do what they can do
24. mthoren68 posted on 03 Mar 2010, 14:59 0
No one makes you buy a phone on contract. If you don't want to pay the ETF, either pay full price and don't be bound by a contract or the ETF, or buy a phone with the intent of keeping it. You have 15 or 30 days to play with it and make sure you want to keep it, that should be more than enough. If you want to return a phone after 6 months, that's just you being fickle and feeling like you have to have the latest and greatest. Why should the carrier subsidize that? You get more than half off the full price of the phone in exchange for signing up under contract. Why should the carrier eat that subsidy just because you want to change phones every 6 months? And is Verizon the only carrier with the mandatory data plans on some phones? Nope, I didn't think so. You obviously have some hard-on for Verizon that is not supported by any reasonable argument. BTW, Verizon is consistently rated no. 1 in customer service. Must be a reason, or are you saying that all 80MM+ customers are blind lemmings?
28. DonLouie posted on 03 Mar 2010, 21:23 0
Att and vzw are the only ones charging for dumbphones because of a cam, crappy browser, and/or a keyboard
29. herbiederb posted on 03 Mar 2010, 21:26 0
I think all customers care more about how good their network is, than vice versa. That said, VZW still has the best customer service compared to the other carriers. VZW has the lowest churn rates in the business even with the highest price plans and ETFs.... you have to figure out why.
30. herbiederb posted on 03 Mar 2010, 21:29 0
Because they can and people still buy it. Until fairly recently, they had the worst selection of phones and yet people still stayed and new customers joined. Its all about the network.
31. DonLouie posted on 04 Mar 2010, 07:24 0
That doesn't necessarily mean vzw is the best just that have good cs and loyal subs, with the new edicts we'll see how long that last, they're still falling behind in 4G
33. herbiederb posted on 04 Mar 2010, 09:35 0
You seem pretty confident... Sprint (S) stock is only $3 and change. Maybe its time for you to buy in.
35. DonLouie posted on 04 Mar 2010, 13:44 0
The price of stock has nothing to do with the reliable, speedy, cost effective and all inclusive service I get. Your fellow subs are revolting over the new data requirement and I do believe LTE is where metered service on vzw will start, you can't convince me that I paying more for less of the same type of service would be beneficial just for a 90M free call/messaging and 5/10 numbers when I get unlimited calls to 250M and 7PM N/W's. We'll see how the great LTE movement is by the end of the year, that's probably when you'll see it
38. herbiederb posted on 04 Mar 2010, 14:09 0
Stock price has everything to do with it. The complaints you listed are not VZW customers. Those are from people who didnt sign with VZW for financial/misc reasons. Metered LTE, maybe, maybe not.. but not a valid argument. Only ATT considering it for their very poor 3G network. Its very hard for you to defend a failing company.
39. HanfordStore posted on 04 Mar 2010, 20:05 0
Sprint does not have much to market at all... Sprint has 4G in like 2 cities, and they have these crazy commercials about them being the only service that has 4G. WEAK!!!!!!
40. DonLouie posted on 06 Mar 2010, 00:13 0
Check vzw's stance on metered service again. Hanford Store, 27 is a lot more than zero
42. herbiederb posted on 06 Mar 2010, 11:32 0
No need to check, were not that desparate for 4G, the 3G is awesome already.
2. desertmike680 posted on 02 Mar 2010, 17:44 0
Being an employee of Sprint, we could careless. Were ahead of the game and always will be.
3. Gowireless posted on 02 Mar 2010, 17:52 0
you guys have 4g in one lil spot and you call that ahead of the game lol ok vzw well always be better sprint will always be the #3 under vzw and at&t
4. herbiederb posted on 02 Mar 2010, 18:20 0
Good luck with you job security and pray that the Supersonic really exists. btw.. it may be #4 under T-mo soon.
6. masteryoda posted on 02 Mar 2010, 18:33 0
Employee of Sprint the "Now" network....what ever that means. Yeah Sprint cares so much about the quality of thier network...they gave it to Ericsson to maintain.
8. rwolf1984 posted on 02 Mar 2010, 18:54 0
if Sprint was ahead of the game they would be the #1 carrier and wouldn't be in such a horrible position. People would want to be with Sprint and not just because their credit sux and no one else will approve them for some phones...
9. underwood2012 posted on 02 Mar 2010, 19:41 0
And who is maintaining/supplying AT&T's future 4G network? Oh that's right, Ericsson is. They are also supplying Verizon's 4G network technology. So suck it, shit head. [Also, why is AT&T bothering to build a 4G network? They have so little 3G that Sprint is beating them! Sprint has over twice as much 3G coverage. I think that is kinda sad. And Sprint's Coverage, without roaming, sucks. I'd know. I think AT&T should rollout a their super-fast 3.5G network nationwide; Even that would compete with Sprint's current 4G rates, and it would get them a lot more customers and a better reputation.]
10. underwood2012 posted on 02 Mar 2010, 19:43 0
Oh, and Sprint isn't being "flashy". They have 4G in 27 cities, which is more than any other US Carrier. Wait until Verizon launches their 4G network, they'll over due it, just like you think Sprint is.
11. rwolf1984 posted on 02 Mar 2010, 19:51 0
Sprint only covers 120 million people...AT&T and Verizon cover nearly 3 times that...
13. masteryoda posted on 02 Mar 2010, 21:00 0
Better check your facts...vzw and att has thier own network opertions...so they maintain thier own network...no matter what vendor it is. As for the "shit head" comment...grow up Hmmm...what sould I do with $3.33? Buy a happy meal or a share of Sprint?
15. DonLouie posted on 03 Mar 2010, 08:55 0
Repeating that lie doesn't make it true. How much more vague can their statements be, give us some dates, markets and pricing. The Boston and Seattle markets missed their Q4 '09 projection
18. phoneguy posted on 03 Mar 2010, 11:09 0
One little spot? Try 27 Markets and 15 more by the end of this year, Hardly one little spot, and that little spot is huge compared to the Spot Verizon has.
19. phoneguy posted on 03 Mar 2010, 11:11 0
Sprints 4G right now covers 120 Million people 4G not regular voice, and considering there are 300 million people in the us I doubt this claim to be true wise guy. Get off your pills.
22. DonLouie posted on 03 Mar 2010, 13:30 0
I love how every LTE announcement has all these "ha take that WiMax" post when nowhere in America vzw has any type of lead. Seattle and Boston have been testing for about a year now but towards the end of the year it was said they would tru to light all 25 - 30 markets together without stating what those other 23 - 28 markets are or the cost.
25. herbiederb posted on 03 Mar 2010, 19:53 0
Trust me, VZW people are not thinking "ha take that WiMax". Theyre quietly and confidently building a SOLID, widespread LTE 4G network and watching Sprint flail and laughing. VZW does not need to advertise FIRST! since theyre raking in the $$. They dont even have to lower their rates and people still happily pay it, and mind you with the lowest churn rates in the business. Heres a heads up.. your days on your Sero plan are numbered. Especially when VZW starts lighting up this amazing LTE network.
26. DonLouie posted on 03 Mar 2010, 20:30 0
exactly my point where is this solid 4G network? Sprint/Clearwire's 4G is picking up subs so how is it failing while the vzw subs laud the great thing none of you have
27. herbiederb posted on 03 Mar 2010, 21:19 0
Theyre building it up and not releasing the bits they have as a 4G network like Spring has been doing. You can turn a blind eye to the truth all you want, but even the lay public is not impressed by Sprints supposed "Nations 1st 4G network".
32. DonLouie posted on 04 Mar 2010, 07:35 0
How can you call me blind when I'm not the one excited while calling the current standard dead and lesser when the competing standard isn't here? Enjoy your high priced metered service in the mystery markets by December
34. herbiederb posted on 04 Mar 2010, 09:36 0
Youre either blind or have your head in the sand. Theres a reason why their CEO is on TV and theyre discounting like crazy.
36. DonLouie posted on 04 Mar 2010, 13:55 0
Have you looked at the trickery vzw is doing, they won't cut prices (by the way, Sprint has touched there prices in more than 2 years) except on the most expensive plan but will sell all their phones dirt cheap and BOGO. Remember when you point the finger, 4 point back at you. On another note, what does that have to do with the mystery markets?
37. herbiederb posted on 04 Mar 2010, 14:03 0
There are no mystery markets b/c they havent turned on the switch yet. No rush to advertise FIRST! Google Sprint deals and you'll see how desparate they are to keep current subs. Youre in denail and arguing for a failing company.
41. DonLouie posted on 06 Mar 2010, 00:21 0
That's weak reasoning, Sprint hasn't changed prices in two years, it's the same deal. Verizon cuts the prices on their phones more than anybody else and moreso recently. I'm just as anxious for the switch to be flipped as their subs
43. herbiederb posted on 06 Mar 2010, 11:33 0
Three recent articles published here should enlighten you on how the rest of the country feels about your beloved Sprint. Consumer Reports, JD Power & Associates, S&P articles.
5. 3watts posted on 02 Mar 2010, 18:24 0
Hmmm, a Sprint employee that "could care less." If you read your own words you might see you make no sense. It's "couldn't care less." If you could care less then...well, you probably don't follow this anyway. Either way, it's good to see Sprint could care less, it's gotten you this far.