1. Welcome to Verizon Forums - the unofficial Verizon community! Have a question about Verizon? Click HERE to get started.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Expecting Cell Phone Forums? We recently moved Verizon specific content to VerizonForums.com. If you previously had an account on CPF, it has been transferred!
    Dismiss Notice

ATT vs. Verizon

Discussion in 'alt.cellular.verizon' started by Brian Grigg, Jun 16, 2004.

  1. Ed Swierk

    Ed Swierk Guest

    On 16 Jun 2004, CharlesH wrote:

    > When AT&T Wireless is absorbed by Cingular, won't the current AT&T
    > Wireless customers be moved to Cingular?


    Yes.

    > And the new AT&T provider (whatever it will be called) will start out
    > with no customers, and have to convince people that it will be better
    > to go with them as a SPCS reseller rather than SPCS directly?


    Yes. I expect that AT&T will pitch its mobile phone service as a
    convenient extra service to its existing long-distance and local landline
    phone customers. Package pricing may make using AT&T cheaper for those
    customers than subscribing to Sprint PCS.

    > And they actually expect the public to understand that the old AT&T
    > Wireless had no connection to AT&T Corporation, and the "new" AT&T
    > wireless provider is totally unrelated to the "old" one?


    I think customers have already gotten used to the idea that brand names
    are ephemeral and practically meaningless, be they banks, department
    stores, tech companies or mobile phone service providers. AT&T's new
    mobile service is likely to remain part of AT&T for exactly as long as it
    takes some upper-management pinhead to decide that spinning off the mobile
    unit for short-term investor gain is preferable to nurturing a set of
    products or services for the long term.

    --Ed

    --
    Ed Swierk
    eswierk-nospam@cs.stanford.edu
     



    › See More: ATT vs. Verizon
  2. Ed Swierk

    Ed Swierk Guest

    On 16 Jun 2004, CharlesH wrote:

    > When AT&T Wireless is absorbed by Cingular, won't the current AT&T
    > Wireless customers be moved to Cingular?


    Yes.

    > And the new AT&T provider (whatever it will be called) will start out
    > with no customers, and have to convince people that it will be better
    > to go with them as a SPCS reseller rather than SPCS directly?


    Yes. I expect that AT&T will pitch its mobile phone service as a
    convenient extra service to its existing long-distance and local landline
    phone customers. Package pricing may make using AT&T cheaper for those
    customers than subscribing to Sprint PCS.

    > And they actually expect the public to understand that the old AT&T
    > Wireless had no connection to AT&T Corporation, and the "new" AT&T
    > wireless provider is totally unrelated to the "old" one?


    I think customers have already gotten used to the idea that brand names
    are ephemeral and practically meaningless, be they banks, department
    stores, tech companies or mobile phone service providers. AT&T's new
    mobile service is likely to remain part of AT&T for exactly as long as it
    takes some upper-management pinhead to decide that spinning off the mobile
    unit for short-term investor gain is preferable to nurturing a set of
    products or services for the long term.

    --Ed

    --
    Ed Swierk
    eswierk-nospam@cs.stanford.edu
     
  3. Ed Swierk

    Ed Swierk Guest

    On 16 Jun 2004, CharlesH wrote:

    > When AT&T Wireless is absorbed by Cingular, won't the current AT&T
    > Wireless customers be moved to Cingular?


    Yes.

    > And the new AT&T provider (whatever it will be called) will start out
    > with no customers, and have to convince people that it will be better
    > to go with them as a SPCS reseller rather than SPCS directly?


    Yes. I expect that AT&T will pitch its mobile phone service as a
    convenient extra service to its existing long-distance and local landline
    phone customers. Package pricing may make using AT&T cheaper for those
    customers than subscribing to Sprint PCS.

    > And they actually expect the public to understand that the old AT&T
    > Wireless had no connection to AT&T Corporation, and the "new" AT&T
    > wireless provider is totally unrelated to the "old" one?


    I think customers have already gotten used to the idea that brand names
    are ephemeral and practically meaningless, be they banks, department
    stores, tech companies or mobile phone service providers. AT&T's new
    mobile service is likely to remain part of AT&T for exactly as long as it
    takes some upper-management pinhead to decide that spinning off the mobile
    unit for short-term investor gain is preferable to nurturing a set of
    products or services for the long term.

    --Ed

    --
    Ed Swierk
    eswierk-nospam@cs.stanford.edu
     
  4. Ed Swierk

    Ed Swierk Guest

    On 16 Jun 2004, CharlesH wrote:

    > When AT&T Wireless is absorbed by Cingular, won't the current AT&T
    > Wireless customers be moved to Cingular?


    Yes.

    > And the new AT&T provider (whatever it will be called) will start out
    > with no customers, and have to convince people that it will be better
    > to go with them as a SPCS reseller rather than SPCS directly?


    Yes. I expect that AT&T will pitch its mobile phone service as a
    convenient extra service to its existing long-distance and local landline
    phone customers. Package pricing may make using AT&T cheaper for those
    customers than subscribing to Sprint PCS.

    > And they actually expect the public to understand that the old AT&T
    > Wireless had no connection to AT&T Corporation, and the "new" AT&T
    > wireless provider is totally unrelated to the "old" one?


    I think customers have already gotten used to the idea that brand names
    are ephemeral and practically meaningless, be they banks, department
    stores, tech companies or mobile phone service providers. AT&T's new
    mobile service is likely to remain part of AT&T for exactly as long as it
    takes some upper-management pinhead to decide that spinning off the mobile
    unit for short-term investor gain is preferable to nurturing a set of
    products or services for the long term.

    --Ed

    --
    Ed Swierk
    eswierk-nospam@cs.stanford.edu
     
  5. Ed Swierk

    Ed Swierk Guest

    On 16 Jun 2004, CharlesH wrote:

    > When AT&T Wireless is absorbed by Cingular, won't the current AT&T
    > Wireless customers be moved to Cingular?


    Yes.

    > And the new AT&T provider (whatever it will be called) will start out
    > with no customers, and have to convince people that it will be better
    > to go with them as a SPCS reseller rather than SPCS directly?


    Yes. I expect that AT&T will pitch its mobile phone service as a
    convenient extra service to its existing long-distance and local landline
    phone customers. Package pricing may make using AT&T cheaper for those
    customers than subscribing to Sprint PCS.

    > And they actually expect the public to understand that the old AT&T
    > Wireless had no connection to AT&T Corporation, and the "new" AT&T
    > wireless provider is totally unrelated to the "old" one?


    I think customers have already gotten used to the idea that brand names
    are ephemeral and practically meaningless, be they banks, department
    stores, tech companies or mobile phone service providers. AT&T's new
    mobile service is likely to remain part of AT&T for exactly as long as it
    takes some upper-management pinhead to decide that spinning off the mobile
    unit for short-term investor gain is preferable to nurturing a set of
    products or services for the long term.

    --Ed

    --
    Ed Swierk
    eswierk-nospam@cs.stanford.edu
     
  6. Ed Swierk

    Ed Swierk Guest

    On 16 Jun 2004, CharlesH wrote:

    > When AT&T Wireless is absorbed by Cingular, won't the current AT&T
    > Wireless customers be moved to Cingular?


    Yes.

    > And the new AT&T provider (whatever it will be called) will start out
    > with no customers, and have to convince people that it will be better
    > to go with them as a SPCS reseller rather than SPCS directly?


    Yes. I expect that AT&T will pitch its mobile phone service as a
    convenient extra service to its existing long-distance and local landline
    phone customers. Package pricing may make using AT&T cheaper for those
    customers than subscribing to Sprint PCS.

    > And they actually expect the public to understand that the old AT&T
    > Wireless had no connection to AT&T Corporation, and the "new" AT&T
    > wireless provider is totally unrelated to the "old" one?


    I think customers have already gotten used to the idea that brand names
    are ephemeral and practically meaningless, be they banks, department
    stores, tech companies or mobile phone service providers. AT&T's new
    mobile service is likely to remain part of AT&T for exactly as long as it
    takes some upper-management pinhead to decide that spinning off the mobile
    unit for short-term investor gain is preferable to nurturing a set of
    products or services for the long term.

    --Ed

    --
    Ed Swierk
    eswierk-nospam@cs.stanford.edu
     
  7. Ed Swierk

    Ed Swierk Guest

    On 16 Jun 2004, CharlesH wrote:

    > When AT&T Wireless is absorbed by Cingular, won't the current AT&T
    > Wireless customers be moved to Cingular?


    Yes.

    > And the new AT&T provider (whatever it will be called) will start out
    > with no customers, and have to convince people that it will be better
    > to go with them as a SPCS reseller rather than SPCS directly?


    Yes. I expect that AT&T will pitch its mobile phone service as a
    convenient extra service to its existing long-distance and local landline
    phone customers. Package pricing may make using AT&T cheaper for those
    customers than subscribing to Sprint PCS.

    > And they actually expect the public to understand that the old AT&T
    > Wireless had no connection to AT&T Corporation, and the "new" AT&T
    > wireless provider is totally unrelated to the "old" one?


    I think customers have already gotten used to the idea that brand names
    are ephemeral and practically meaningless, be they banks, department
    stores, tech companies or mobile phone service providers. AT&T's new
    mobile service is likely to remain part of AT&T for exactly as long as it
    takes some upper-management pinhead to decide that spinning off the mobile
    unit for short-term investor gain is preferable to nurturing a set of
    products or services for the long term.

    --Ed

    --
    Ed Swierk
    eswierk-nospam@cs.stanford.edu
     
  8. Ed Swierk

    Ed Swierk Guest

    On 16 Jun 2004, CharlesH wrote:

    > When AT&T Wireless is absorbed by Cingular, won't the current AT&T
    > Wireless customers be moved to Cingular?


    Yes.

    > And the new AT&T provider (whatever it will be called) will start out
    > with no customers, and have to convince people that it will be better
    > to go with them as a SPCS reseller rather than SPCS directly?


    Yes. I expect that AT&T will pitch its mobile phone service as a
    convenient extra service to its existing long-distance and local landline
    phone customers. Package pricing may make using AT&T cheaper for those
    customers than subscribing to Sprint PCS.

    > And they actually expect the public to understand that the old AT&T
    > Wireless had no connection to AT&T Corporation, and the "new" AT&T
    > wireless provider is totally unrelated to the "old" one?


    I think customers have already gotten used to the idea that brand names
    are ephemeral and practically meaningless, be they banks, department
    stores, tech companies or mobile phone service providers. AT&T's new
    mobile service is likely to remain part of AT&T for exactly as long as it
    takes some upper-management pinhead to decide that spinning off the mobile
    unit for short-term investor gain is preferable to nurturing a set of
    products or services for the long term.

    --Ed

    --
    Ed Swierk
    eswierk-nospam@cs.stanford.edu
     
  9. Dan Albrich

    Dan Albrich Guest

    Hello Brian-

    It's actually really important to mention where you are so that we can
    better help you. As much as people argue relentlessly over which is better,
    the basic issue is that each company has its merits.

    Coverage wise, I do not agree that Verizon is better-- it all depends on
    where you work, live and travel. For example, Verizon has zero native
    coverage just south of Eugene until you get quite a ways into California.
    Verizon can roam, but coverage and features aren't ideal. AT&T has more
    native coverage in southern Oregon, and their GSM system provides completely
    seemless roaming options and good coverage from here all the way down I5.

    I'm just giving you one specific example from my area to show you that
    depending on which location you refer to, Verizon may not be the best
    choice.

    Some biased info/opinion:

    CUSTOMER SERVICE wise, Verizon wins hands down (in my opinion).
    COVERAGE wise- it all depends. Study the maps, GSM coverage (sum in total)
    is less than either CDMA/analog or TDMA/analog so you need to study
    available coverage maps to understand if GSM works for you. [The winner is
    which works best for you]
    DATA- Free data can be had on Verizon, but no data when roaming. AT&T has
    good data service that works even when you roam (very appealing to me) but
    they charge something for it.
    ROAMING - GSM roaming is seemless. Verizon roaming means you can still place
    and receive calls but you lose basic features -- even things like voicemail
    indication don't generally work when roaming.
    PHONES - no contest, AT&T wins, and will probably always win. Verizon has
    never carried any "cool" phones and probably never will. If Verizon had
    something like the T616, I'd change my mind.
    Don't jump to Verizon thinking they'll eventually carry a phone you like.
    I've been with them now for years, and I've never been pleased with their
    phone selection, and feel convinced it will never improve.
    COST - AT&T is cheaper in my area than Verizon. One could argue you get
    what you pay for.

    -Dan

    --
    Eugene, Oregon -- Pacific Northwest
    http://cell.uoregon.edu


    "Brian Grigg" <bgrigg@ursinfo.com> wrote in message
    news:e8mdnbFtkMfVAk3dRVn-hg@comcast.com...
    > My plan with AT&T expired and I'm looking to renew but was wondering if I
    > should switch to Verizon as I've heard they're coverage is much better.

    But
    > I'm not impressed with the phones they have available. I'm also thinking

    of
    > getting a Smart or PDA phone and AT&T just announced the Audiovox PPC4100,
    > but I was reading that Verizon will be carrying the Audiovox PPC 5050
    > although Verizon hasn't and won't make any announcement on it yet.
    >
    > So I was wondering how people like Verizon, and if anyone has any thoughts
    > on either of the Audiovox's?
    >
    > tia - Brian
    >
    >
     
  10. Dan Albrich

    Dan Albrich Guest

    Hello Brian-

    It's actually really important to mention where you are so that we can
    better help you. As much as people argue relentlessly over which is better,
    the basic issue is that each company has its merits.

    Coverage wise, I do not agree that Verizon is better-- it all depends on
    where you work, live and travel. For example, Verizon has zero native
    coverage just south of Eugene until you get quite a ways into California.
    Verizon can roam, but coverage and features aren't ideal. AT&T has more
    native coverage in southern Oregon, and their GSM system provides completely
    seemless roaming options and good coverage from here all the way down I5.

    I'm just giving you one specific example from my area to show you that
    depending on which location you refer to, Verizon may not be the best
    choice.

    Some biased info/opinion:

    CUSTOMER SERVICE wise, Verizon wins hands down (in my opinion).
    COVERAGE wise- it all depends. Study the maps, GSM coverage (sum in total)
    is less than either CDMA/analog or TDMA/analog so you need to study
    available coverage maps to understand if GSM works for you. [The winner is
    which works best for you]
    DATA- Free data can be had on Verizon, but no data when roaming. AT&T has
    good data service that works even when you roam (very appealing to me) but
    they charge something for it.
    ROAMING - GSM roaming is seemless. Verizon roaming means you can still place
    and receive calls but you lose basic features -- even things like voicemail
    indication don't generally work when roaming.
    PHONES - no contest, AT&T wins, and will probably always win. Verizon has
    never carried any "cool" phones and probably never will. If Verizon had
    something like the T616, I'd change my mind.
    Don't jump to Verizon thinking they'll eventually carry a phone you like.
    I've been with them now for years, and I've never been pleased with their
    phone selection, and feel convinced it will never improve.
    COST - AT&T is cheaper in my area than Verizon. One could argue you get
    what you pay for.

    -Dan

    --
    Eugene, Oregon -- Pacific Northwest
    http://cell.uoregon.edu


    "Brian Grigg" <bgrigg@ursinfo.com> wrote in message
    news:e8mdnbFtkMfVAk3dRVn-hg@comcast.com...
    > My plan with AT&T expired and I'm looking to renew but was wondering if I
    > should switch to Verizon as I've heard they're coverage is much better.

    But
    > I'm not impressed with the phones they have available. I'm also thinking

    of
    > getting a Smart or PDA phone and AT&T just announced the Audiovox PPC4100,
    > but I was reading that Verizon will be carrying the Audiovox PPC 5050
    > although Verizon hasn't and won't make any announcement on it yet.
    >
    > So I was wondering how people like Verizon, and if anyone has any thoughts
    > on either of the Audiovox's?
    >
    > tia - Brian
    >
    >
     
  11. Dan Albrich

    Dan Albrich Guest

    Hello Brian-

    It's actually really important to mention where you are so that we can
    better help you. As much as people argue relentlessly over which is better,
    the basic issue is that each company has its merits.

    Coverage wise, I do not agree that Verizon is better-- it all depends on
    where you work, live and travel. For example, Verizon has zero native
    coverage just south of Eugene until you get quite a ways into California.
    Verizon can roam, but coverage and features aren't ideal. AT&T has more
    native coverage in southern Oregon, and their GSM system provides completely
    seemless roaming options and good coverage from here all the way down I5.

    I'm just giving you one specific example from my area to show you that
    depending on which location you refer to, Verizon may not be the best
    choice.

    Some biased info/opinion:

    CUSTOMER SERVICE wise, Verizon wins hands down (in my opinion).
    COVERAGE wise- it all depends. Study the maps, GSM coverage (sum in total)
    is less than either CDMA/analog or TDMA/analog so you need to study
    available coverage maps to understand if GSM works for you. [The winner is
    which works best for you]
    DATA- Free data can be had on Verizon, but no data when roaming. AT&T has
    good data service that works even when you roam (very appealing to me) but
    they charge something for it.
    ROAMING - GSM roaming is seemless. Verizon roaming means you can still place
    and receive calls but you lose basic features -- even things like voicemail
    indication don't generally work when roaming.
    PHONES - no contest, AT&T wins, and will probably always win. Verizon has
    never carried any "cool" phones and probably never will. If Verizon had
    something like the T616, I'd change my mind.
    Don't jump to Verizon thinking they'll eventually carry a phone you like.
    I've been with them now for years, and I've never been pleased with their
    phone selection, and feel convinced it will never improve.
    COST - AT&T is cheaper in my area than Verizon. One could argue you get
    what you pay for.

    -Dan

    --
    Eugene, Oregon -- Pacific Northwest
    http://cell.uoregon.edu


    "Brian Grigg" <bgrigg@ursinfo.com> wrote in message
    news:e8mdnbFtkMfVAk3dRVn-hg@comcast.com...
    > My plan with AT&T expired and I'm looking to renew but was wondering if I
    > should switch to Verizon as I've heard they're coverage is much better.

    But
    > I'm not impressed with the phones they have available. I'm also thinking

    of
    > getting a Smart or PDA phone and AT&T just announced the Audiovox PPC4100,
    > but I was reading that Verizon will be carrying the Audiovox PPC 5050
    > although Verizon hasn't and won't make any announcement on it yet.
    >
    > So I was wondering how people like Verizon, and if anyone has any thoughts
    > on either of the Audiovox's?
    >
    > tia - Brian
    >
    >
     
  12. Dan Albrich

    Dan Albrich Guest

    Hello Brian-

    It's actually really important to mention where you are so that we can
    better help you. As much as people argue relentlessly over which is better,
    the basic issue is that each company has its merits.

    Coverage wise, I do not agree that Verizon is better-- it all depends on
    where you work, live and travel. For example, Verizon has zero native
    coverage just south of Eugene until you get quite a ways into California.
    Verizon can roam, but coverage and features aren't ideal. AT&T has more
    native coverage in southern Oregon, and their GSM system provides completely
    seemless roaming options and good coverage from here all the way down I5.

    I'm just giving you one specific example from my area to show you that
    depending on which location you refer to, Verizon may not be the best
    choice.

    Some biased info/opinion:

    CUSTOMER SERVICE wise, Verizon wins hands down (in my opinion).
    COVERAGE wise- it all depends. Study the maps, GSM coverage (sum in total)
    is less than either CDMA/analog or TDMA/analog so you need to study
    available coverage maps to understand if GSM works for you. [The winner is
    which works best for you]
    DATA- Free data can be had on Verizon, but no data when roaming. AT&T has
    good data service that works even when you roam (very appealing to me) but
    they charge something for it.
    ROAMING - GSM roaming is seemless. Verizon roaming means you can still place
    and receive calls but you lose basic features -- even things like voicemail
    indication don't generally work when roaming.
    PHONES - no contest, AT&T wins, and will probably always win. Verizon has
    never carried any "cool" phones and probably never will. If Verizon had
    something like the T616, I'd change my mind.
    Don't jump to Verizon thinking they'll eventually carry a phone you like.
    I've been with them now for years, and I've never been pleased with their
    phone selection, and feel convinced it will never improve.
    COST - AT&T is cheaper in my area than Verizon. One could argue you get
    what you pay for.

    -Dan

    --
    Eugene, Oregon -- Pacific Northwest
    http://cell.uoregon.edu


    "Brian Grigg" <bgrigg@ursinfo.com> wrote in message
    news:e8mdnbFtkMfVAk3dRVn-hg@comcast.com...
    > My plan with AT&T expired and I'm looking to renew but was wondering if I
    > should switch to Verizon as I've heard they're coverage is much better.

    But
    > I'm not impressed with the phones they have available. I'm also thinking

    of
    > getting a Smart or PDA phone and AT&T just announced the Audiovox PPC4100,
    > but I was reading that Verizon will be carrying the Audiovox PPC 5050
    > although Verizon hasn't and won't make any announcement on it yet.
    >
    > So I was wondering how people like Verizon, and if anyone has any thoughts
    > on either of the Audiovox's?
    >
    > tia - Brian
    >
    >
     
  13. Dan Albrich

    Dan Albrich Guest

    Hello Brian-

    It's actually really important to mention where you are so that we can
    better help you. As much as people argue relentlessly over which is better,
    the basic issue is that each company has its merits.

    Coverage wise, I do not agree that Verizon is better-- it all depends on
    where you work, live and travel. For example, Verizon has zero native
    coverage just south of Eugene until you get quite a ways into California.
    Verizon can roam, but coverage and features aren't ideal. AT&T has more
    native coverage in southern Oregon, and their GSM system provides completely
    seemless roaming options and good coverage from here all the way down I5.

    I'm just giving you one specific example from my area to show you that
    depending on which location you refer to, Verizon may not be the best
    choice.

    Some biased info/opinion:

    CUSTOMER SERVICE wise, Verizon wins hands down (in my opinion).
    COVERAGE wise- it all depends. Study the maps, GSM coverage (sum in total)
    is less than either CDMA/analog or TDMA/analog so you need to study
    available coverage maps to understand if GSM works for you. [The winner is
    which works best for you]
    DATA- Free data can be had on Verizon, but no data when roaming. AT&T has
    good data service that works even when you roam (very appealing to me) but
    they charge something for it.
    ROAMING - GSM roaming is seemless. Verizon roaming means you can still place
    and receive calls but you lose basic features -- even things like voicemail
    indication don't generally work when roaming.
    PHONES - no contest, AT&T wins, and will probably always win. Verizon has
    never carried any "cool" phones and probably never will. If Verizon had
    something like the T616, I'd change my mind.
    Don't jump to Verizon thinking they'll eventually carry a phone you like.
    I've been with them now for years, and I've never been pleased with their
    phone selection, and feel convinced it will never improve.
    COST - AT&T is cheaper in my area than Verizon. One could argue you get
    what you pay for.

    -Dan

    --
    Eugene, Oregon -- Pacific Northwest
    http://cell.uoregon.edu


    "Brian Grigg" <bgrigg@ursinfo.com> wrote in message
    news:e8mdnbFtkMfVAk3dRVn-hg@comcast.com...
    > My plan with AT&T expired and I'm looking to renew but was wondering if I
    > should switch to Verizon as I've heard they're coverage is much better.

    But
    > I'm not impressed with the phones they have available. I'm also thinking

    of
    > getting a Smart or PDA phone and AT&T just announced the Audiovox PPC4100,
    > but I was reading that Verizon will be carrying the Audiovox PPC 5050
    > although Verizon hasn't and won't make any announcement on it yet.
    >
    > So I was wondering how people like Verizon, and if anyone has any thoughts
    > on either of the Audiovox's?
    >
    > tia - Brian
    >
    >
     
  14. Dan Albrich

    Dan Albrich Guest

    Hello Brian-

    It's actually really important to mention where you are so that we can
    better help you. As much as people argue relentlessly over which is better,
    the basic issue is that each company has its merits.

    Coverage wise, I do not agree that Verizon is better-- it all depends on
    where you work, live and travel. For example, Verizon has zero native
    coverage just south of Eugene until you get quite a ways into California.
    Verizon can roam, but coverage and features aren't ideal. AT&T has more
    native coverage in southern Oregon, and their GSM system provides completely
    seemless roaming options and good coverage from here all the way down I5.

    I'm just giving you one specific example from my area to show you that
    depending on which location you refer to, Verizon may not be the best
    choice.

    Some biased info/opinion:

    CUSTOMER SERVICE wise, Verizon wins hands down (in my opinion).
    COVERAGE wise- it all depends. Study the maps, GSM coverage (sum in total)
    is less than either CDMA/analog or TDMA/analog so you need to study
    available coverage maps to understand if GSM works for you. [The winner is
    which works best for you]
    DATA- Free data can be had on Verizon, but no data when roaming. AT&T has
    good data service that works even when you roam (very appealing to me) but
    they charge something for it.
    ROAMING - GSM roaming is seemless. Verizon roaming means you can still place
    and receive calls but you lose basic features -- even things like voicemail
    indication don't generally work when roaming.
    PHONES - no contest, AT&T wins, and will probably always win. Verizon has
    never carried any "cool" phones and probably never will. If Verizon had
    something like the T616, I'd change my mind.
    Don't jump to Verizon thinking they'll eventually carry a phone you like.
    I've been with them now for years, and I've never been pleased with their
    phone selection, and feel convinced it will never improve.
    COST - AT&T is cheaper in my area than Verizon. One could argue you get
    what you pay for.

    -Dan

    --
    Eugene, Oregon -- Pacific Northwest
    http://cell.uoregon.edu


    "Brian Grigg" <bgrigg@ursinfo.com> wrote in message
    news:e8mdnbFtkMfVAk3dRVn-hg@comcast.com...
    > My plan with AT&T expired and I'm looking to renew but was wondering if I
    > should switch to Verizon as I've heard they're coverage is much better.

    But
    > I'm not impressed with the phones they have available. I'm also thinking

    of
    > getting a Smart or PDA phone and AT&T just announced the Audiovox PPC4100,
    > but I was reading that Verizon will be carrying the Audiovox PPC 5050
    > although Verizon hasn't and won't make any announcement on it yet.
    >
    > So I was wondering how people like Verizon, and if anyone has any thoughts
    > on either of the Audiovox's?
    >
    > tia - Brian
    >
    >
     
  15. Dan Albrich

    Dan Albrich Guest

    Hello Brian-

    It's actually really important to mention where you are so that we can
    better help you. As much as people argue relentlessly over which is better,
    the basic issue is that each company has its merits.

    Coverage wise, I do not agree that Verizon is better-- it all depends on
    where you work, live and travel. For example, Verizon has zero native
    coverage just south of Eugene until you get quite a ways into California.
    Verizon can roam, but coverage and features aren't ideal. AT&T has more
    native coverage in southern Oregon, and their GSM system provides completely
    seemless roaming options and good coverage from here all the way down I5.

    I'm just giving you one specific example from my area to show you that
    depending on which location you refer to, Verizon may not be the best
    choice.

    Some biased info/opinion:

    CUSTOMER SERVICE wise, Verizon wins hands down (in my opinion).
    COVERAGE wise- it all depends. Study the maps, GSM coverage (sum in total)
    is less than either CDMA/analog or TDMA/analog so you need to study
    available coverage maps to understand if GSM works for you. [The winner is
    which works best for you]
    DATA- Free data can be had on Verizon, but no data when roaming. AT&T has
    good data service that works even when you roam (very appealing to me) but
    they charge something for it.
    ROAMING - GSM roaming is seemless. Verizon roaming means you can still place
    and receive calls but you lose basic features -- even things like voicemail
    indication don't generally work when roaming.
    PHONES - no contest, AT&T wins, and will probably always win. Verizon has
    never carried any "cool" phones and probably never will. If Verizon had
    something like the T616, I'd change my mind.
    Don't jump to Verizon thinking they'll eventually carry a phone you like.
    I've been with them now for years, and I've never been pleased with their
    phone selection, and feel convinced it will never improve.
    COST - AT&T is cheaper in my area than Verizon. One could argue you get
    what you pay for.

    -Dan

    --
    Eugene, Oregon -- Pacific Northwest
    http://cell.uoregon.edu


    "Brian Grigg" <bgrigg@ursinfo.com> wrote in message
    news:e8mdnbFtkMfVAk3dRVn-hg@comcast.com...
    > My plan with AT&T expired and I'm looking to renew but was wondering if I
    > should switch to Verizon as I've heard they're coverage is much better.

    But
    > I'm not impressed with the phones they have available. I'm also thinking

    of
    > getting a Smart or PDA phone and AT&T just announced the Audiovox PPC4100,
    > but I was reading that Verizon will be carrying the Audiovox PPC 5050
    > although Verizon hasn't and won't make any announcement on it yet.
    >
    > So I was wondering how people like Verizon, and if anyone has any thoughts
    > on either of the Audiovox's?
    >
    > tia - Brian
    >
    >
     
  16. Dan Albrich

    Dan Albrich Guest

    Hello Brian-

    It's actually really important to mention where you are so that we can
    better help you. As much as people argue relentlessly over which is better,
    the basic issue is that each company has its merits.

    Coverage wise, I do not agree that Verizon is better-- it all depends on
    where you work, live and travel. For example, Verizon has zero native
    coverage just south of Eugene until you get quite a ways into California.
    Verizon can roam, but coverage and features aren't ideal. AT&T has more
    native coverage in southern Oregon, and their GSM system provides completely
    seemless roaming options and good coverage from here all the way down I5.

    I'm just giving you one specific example from my area to show you that
    depending on which location you refer to, Verizon may not be the best
    choice.

    Some biased info/opinion:

    CUSTOMER SERVICE wise, Verizon wins hands down (in my opinion).
    COVERAGE wise- it all depends. Study the maps, GSM coverage (sum in total)
    is less than either CDMA/analog or TDMA/analog so you need to study
    available coverage maps to understand if GSM works for you. [The winner is
    which works best for you]
    DATA- Free data can be had on Verizon, but no data when roaming. AT&T has
    good data service that works even when you roam (very appealing to me) but
    they charge something for it.
    ROAMING - GSM roaming is seemless. Verizon roaming means you can still place
    and receive calls but you lose basic features -- even things like voicemail
    indication don't generally work when roaming.
    PHONES - no contest, AT&T wins, and will probably always win. Verizon has
    never carried any "cool" phones and probably never will. If Verizon had
    something like the T616, I'd change my mind.
    Don't jump to Verizon thinking they'll eventually carry a phone you like.
    I've been with them now for years, and I've never been pleased with their
    phone selection, and feel convinced it will never improve.
    COST - AT&T is cheaper in my area than Verizon. One could argue you get
    what you pay for.

    -Dan

    --
    Eugene, Oregon -- Pacific Northwest
    http://cell.uoregon.edu


    "Brian Grigg" <bgrigg@ursinfo.com> wrote in message
    news:e8mdnbFtkMfVAk3dRVn-hg@comcast.com...
    > My plan with AT&T expired and I'm looking to renew but was wondering if I
    > should switch to Verizon as I've heard they're coverage is much better.

    But
    > I'm not impressed with the phones they have available. I'm also thinking

    of
    > getting a Smart or PDA phone and AT&T just announced the Audiovox PPC4100,
    > but I was reading that Verizon will be carrying the Audiovox PPC 5050
    > although Verizon hasn't and won't make any announcement on it yet.
    >
    > So I was wondering how people like Verizon, and if anyone has any thoughts
    > on either of the Audiovox's?
    >
    > tia - Brian
    >
    >
     
  17. Dan Albrich

    Dan Albrich Guest

    Hello Brian-

    It's actually really important to mention where you are so that we can
    better help you. As much as people argue relentlessly over which is better,
    the basic issue is that each company has its merits.

    Coverage wise, I do not agree that Verizon is better-- it all depends on
    where you work, live and travel. For example, Verizon has zero native
    coverage just south of Eugene until you get quite a ways into California.
    Verizon can roam, but coverage and features aren't ideal. AT&T has more
    native coverage in southern Oregon, and their GSM system provides completely
    seemless roaming options and good coverage from here all the way down I5.

    I'm just giving you one specific example from my area to show you that
    depending on which location you refer to, Verizon may not be the best
    choice.

    Some biased info/opinion:

    CUSTOMER SERVICE wise, Verizon wins hands down (in my opinion).
    COVERAGE wise- it all depends. Study the maps, GSM coverage (sum in total)
    is less than either CDMA/analog or TDMA/analog so you need to study
    available coverage maps to understand if GSM works for you. [The winner is
    which works best for you]
    DATA- Free data can be had on Verizon, but no data when roaming. AT&T has
    good data service that works even when you roam (very appealing to me) but
    they charge something for it.
    ROAMING - GSM roaming is seemless. Verizon roaming means you can still place
    and receive calls but you lose basic features -- even things like voicemail
    indication don't generally work when roaming.
    PHONES - no contest, AT&T wins, and will probably always win. Verizon has
    never carried any "cool" phones and probably never will. If Verizon had
    something like the T616, I'd change my mind.
    Don't jump to Verizon thinking they'll eventually carry a phone you like.
    I've been with them now for years, and I've never been pleased with their
    phone selection, and feel convinced it will never improve.
    COST - AT&T is cheaper in my area than Verizon. One could argue you get
    what you pay for.

    -Dan

    --
    Eugene, Oregon -- Pacific Northwest
    http://cell.uoregon.edu


    "Brian Grigg" <bgrigg@ursinfo.com> wrote in message
    news:e8mdnbFtkMfVAk3dRVn-hg@comcast.com...
    > My plan with AT&T expired and I'm looking to renew but was wondering if I
    > should switch to Verizon as I've heard they're coverage is much better.

    But
    > I'm not impressed with the phones they have available. I'm also thinking

    of
    > getting a Smart or PDA phone and AT&T just announced the Audiovox PPC4100,
    > but I was reading that Verizon will be carrying the Audiovox PPC 5050
    > although Verizon hasn't and won't make any announcement on it yet.
    >
    > So I was wondering how people like Verizon, and if anyone has any thoughts
    > on either of the Audiovox's?
    >
    > tia - Brian
    >
    >
     
  18. Dan Albrich

    Dan Albrich Guest

    Hello Brian-

    It's actually really important to mention where you are so that we can
    better help you. As much as people argue relentlessly over which is better,
    the basic issue is that each company has its merits.

    Coverage wise, I do not agree that Verizon is better-- it all depends on
    where you work, live and travel. For example, Verizon has zero native
    coverage just south of Eugene until you get quite a ways into California.
    Verizon can roam, but coverage and features aren't ideal. AT&T has more
    native coverage in southern Oregon, and their GSM system provides completely
    seemless roaming options and good coverage from here all the way down I5.

    I'm just giving you one specific example from my area to show you that
    depending on which location you refer to, Verizon may not be the best
    choice.

    Some biased info/opinion:

    CUSTOMER SERVICE wise, Verizon wins hands down (in my opinion).
    COVERAGE wise- it all depends. Study the maps, GSM coverage (sum in total)
    is less than either CDMA/analog or TDMA/analog so you need to study
    available coverage maps to understand if GSM works for you. [The winner is
    which works best for you]
    DATA- Free data can be had on Verizon, but no data when roaming. AT&T has
    good data service that works even when you roam (very appealing to me) but
    they charge something for it.
    ROAMING - GSM roaming is seemless. Verizon roaming means you can still place
    and receive calls but you lose basic features -- even things like voicemail
    indication don't generally work when roaming.
    PHONES - no contest, AT&T wins, and will probably always win. Verizon has
    never carried any "cool" phones and probably never will. If Verizon had
    something like the T616, I'd change my mind.
    Don't jump to Verizon thinking they'll eventually carry a phone you like.
    I've been with them now for years, and I've never been pleased with their
    phone selection, and feel convinced it will never improve.
    COST - AT&T is cheaper in my area than Verizon. One could argue you get
    what you pay for.

    -Dan

    --
    Eugene, Oregon -- Pacific Northwest
    http://cell.uoregon.edu


    "Brian Grigg" <bgrigg@ursinfo.com> wrote in message
    news:e8mdnbFtkMfVAk3dRVn-hg@comcast.com...
    > My plan with AT&T expired and I'm looking to renew but was wondering if I
    > should switch to Verizon as I've heard they're coverage is much better.

    But
    > I'm not impressed with the phones they have available. I'm also thinking

    of
    > getting a Smart or PDA phone and AT&T just announced the Audiovox PPC4100,
    > but I was reading that Verizon will be carrying the Audiovox PPC 5050
    > although Verizon hasn't and won't make any announcement on it yet.
    >
    > So I was wondering how people like Verizon, and if anyone has any thoughts
    > on either of the Audiovox's?
    >
    > tia - Brian
    >
    >
     
  19. Dan Albrich

    Dan Albrich Guest

    Hello Brian-

    It's actually really important to mention where you are so that we can
    better help you. As much as people argue relentlessly over which is better,
    the basic issue is that each company has its merits.

    Coverage wise, I do not agree that Verizon is better-- it all depends on
    where you work, live and travel. For example, Verizon has zero native
    coverage just south of Eugene until you get quite a ways into California.
    Verizon can roam, but coverage and features aren't ideal. AT&T has more
    native coverage in southern Oregon, and their GSM system provides completely
    seemless roaming options and good coverage from here all the way down I5.

    I'm just giving you one specific example from my area to show you that
    depending on which location you refer to, Verizon may not be the best
    choice.

    Some biased info/opinion:

    CUSTOMER SERVICE wise, Verizon wins hands down (in my opinion).
    COVERAGE wise- it all depends. Study the maps, GSM coverage (sum in total)
    is less than either CDMA/analog or TDMA/analog so you need to study
    available coverage maps to understand if GSM works for you. [The winner is
    which works best for you]
    DATA- Free data can be had on Verizon, but no data when roaming. AT&T has
    good data service that works even when you roam (very appealing to me) but
    they charge something for it.
    ROAMING - GSM roaming is seemless. Verizon roaming means you can still place
    and receive calls but you lose basic features -- even things like voicemail
    indication don't generally work when roaming.
    PHONES - no contest, AT&T wins, and will probably always win. Verizon has
    never carried any "cool" phones and probably never will. If Verizon had
    something like the T616, I'd change my mind.
    Don't jump to Verizon thinking they'll eventually carry a phone you like.
    I've been with them now for years, and I've never been pleased with their
    phone selection, and feel convinced it will never improve.
    COST - AT&T is cheaper in my area than Verizon. One could argue you get
    what you pay for.

    -Dan

    --
    Eugene, Oregon -- Pacific Northwest
    http://cell.uoregon.edu


    "Brian Grigg" <bgrigg@ursinfo.com> wrote in message
    news:e8mdnbFtkMfVAk3dRVn-hg@comcast.com...
    > My plan with AT&T expired and I'm looking to renew but was wondering if I
    > should switch to Verizon as I've heard they're coverage is much better.

    But
    > I'm not impressed with the phones they have available. I'm also thinking

    of
    > getting a Smart or PDA phone and AT&T just announced the Audiovox PPC4100,
    > but I was reading that Verizon will be carrying the Audiovox PPC 5050
    > although Verizon hasn't and won't make any announcement on it yet.
    >
    > So I was wondering how people like Verizon, and if anyone has any thoughts
    > on either of the Audiovox's?
    >
    > tia - Brian
    >
    >
     
  20. Dan Albrich

    Dan Albrich Guest

    Hello Brian-

    It's actually really important to mention where you are so that we can
    better help you. As much as people argue relentlessly over which is better,
    the basic issue is that each company has its merits.

    Coverage wise, I do not agree that Verizon is better-- it all depends on
    where you work, live and travel. For example, Verizon has zero native
    coverage just south of Eugene until you get quite a ways into California.
    Verizon can roam, but coverage and features aren't ideal. AT&T has more
    native coverage in southern Oregon, and their GSM system provides completely
    seemless roaming options and good coverage from here all the way down I5.

    I'm just giving you one specific example from my area to show you that
    depending on which location you refer to, Verizon may not be the best
    choice.

    Some biased info/opinion:

    CUSTOMER SERVICE wise, Verizon wins hands down (in my opinion).
    COVERAGE wise- it all depends. Study the maps, GSM coverage (sum in total)
    is less than either CDMA/analog or TDMA/analog so you need to study
    available coverage maps to understand if GSM works for you. [The winner is
    which works best for you]
    DATA- Free data can be had on Verizon, but no data when roaming. AT&T has
    good data service that works even when you roam (very appealing to me) but
    they charge something for it.
    ROAMING - GSM roaming is seemless. Verizon roaming means you can still place
    and receive calls but you lose basic features -- even things like voicemail
    indication don't generally work when roaming.
    PHONES - no contest, AT&T wins, and will probably always win. Verizon has
    never carried any "cool" phones and probably never will. If Verizon had
    something like the T616, I'd change my mind.
    Don't jump to Verizon thinking they'll eventually carry a phone you like.
    I've been with them now for years, and I've never been pleased with their
    phone selection, and feel convinced it will never improve.
    COST - AT&T is cheaper in my area than Verizon. One could argue you get
    what you pay for.

    -Dan

    --
    Eugene, Oregon -- Pacific Northwest
    http://cell.uoregon.edu


    "Brian Grigg" <bgrigg@ursinfo.com> wrote in message
    news:e8mdnbFtkMfVAk3dRVn-hg@comcast.com...
    > My plan with AT&T expired and I'm looking to renew but was wondering if I
    > should switch to Verizon as I've heard they're coverage is much better.

    But
    > I'm not impressed with the phones they have available. I'm also thinking

    of
    > getting a Smart or PDA phone and AT&T just announced the Audiovox PPC4100,
    > but I was reading that Verizon will be carrying the Audiovox PPC 5050
    > although Verizon hasn't and won't make any announcement on it yet.
    >
    > So I was wondering how people like Verizon, and if anyone has any thoughts
    > on either of the Audiovox's?
    >
    > tia - Brian
    >
    >
     

Welcome to VerizonForums!

Unfortunately you can't reply until you log in or sign up.


Forgot your password?