[consv93]

The Priv on Verizon has been a disaster - five months late, no regular updates from Verizon, overpriced, slow sales.

What are the chances the Mercury - if it is real - gets a Verizon variant?

[thurask]

Doubtful, especially if it's being made by some Indonesian/Chinese outfit.

[ChainPunch]

So sad for those that verizon is the only option.

Posted via CB10

[johnb_xp]

Yeah Verizon hasn't updated the Priv to marshmallow yet so I think they've given up on BB at this point.

Posted via my Galaxy S3 (Waiting for the Mercury!)

[Avenzuno]

Is the problem that Verizon shows a bias against BlackBerry such as it's slow to issue OS updates to any BlackBerry device, whether BB10 or Android (Priv)? If so, that and Verizon's changing tech -- the impending shut down of CDMA -- could be a factor.

Posted via CB10 on my VZW  Z30 STA100-3 | 10.3.2.2813

[djslam]

I'm wondering this as well. But it seems the future of BlackBerry phones don't seem to be tied to any carrier. Just look at Dtek50 and 60. Those aren't even possible to use on Verizon.

Posted via CB10

[jbarrack]

It's better for the phone and the consumer to not be carrier locked. Look at the Priv on Verizon. 6 months later and no update. That's what you get for being on America's number 1 most reliable network.

The only company with the balls to stand up to the carriers is Apple. Gotta give them credit for that. You play by their rules for branding (none) and updating (whenever they say so) or you don't play at all.

Samsung is in a position to do the same thing and they should do it fast. Verizon removed portions of menus, features and settings options with the Note 7 on their network. All for Verizons benefit, not for the consumer.

Posted via CB 10 on Passport SE

[ChainPunch]

Even when cdma is phased out it is not clear if Verizon is going to let non verizon phones on their network.

Posted via CB10

[JD_CB]

_Duplicate Nexus and Motorola. Make this phone compatible with GSM & CDMA networks: J.

[crucial bbq]

Is the problem that Verizon shows a bias against BlackBerry such as it's slow to issue OS updates to any BlackBerry device, whether BB10 or Android (Priv)? If so, that and Verizon's changing tech -- the impending shut down of CDMA -- could be a factor.

Posted via CB10 on my VZW  Z30 STA100-3 | 10.3.2.2813

Just prior to carrying Priv, Verizon had Classic, Q10 , Z10, Z30, and a Bold. I believe there were also two models each of Q10 and of Bold, one with a camera and one without. These were all on display at my local Verizon corporate store and on their website. No other U.S. carrier has ever stocked as many BBs, so this idea that Verizon is biased towards BlackBerry is false.

Verizon is slow to push updates on all handsets they carry but you can bet that the current versions of both the Galaxy S line and the Note line will be first. They don't even favor their own Droid branded handsets.

Verizon's CDMA shutdown is now targeted to be complete by 12/2019.

It's better for the phone and the consumer to not be carrier locked. Look at the Priv on Verizon. 6 months later and no update. That's what you get for being on America's number 1 most reliable network.

The only company with the balls to stand up to the carriers is Apple. Gotta give them credit for that. You play by their rules for branding (none) and updating (whenever they say so) or you don't play at all.

Samsung is in a position to do the same thing and they should do it fast. Verizon removed portions of menus, features and settings options with the Note 7 on their network. All for Verizons benefit, not for the consumer.

Posted via CB 10 on Passport SE

The average U.S. consumer does not care if the device is carrier locked or not, and probably won't for a really long time. Now, being locked into a contract is a different story.

Verizon claims to do the most rigorous testing out there. The current rumor (or lie. Or truth) is that Verizon found an issue between Priv, MM, and Verizon's Advanced LTE, sent it back to BB for fixin', and now we are just waiting for further testing.

As for Apple, they make their money through iOS (and in general) through iTunes and App Store, not so much with device sales. Thing is, with iPhone and Galaxy SX devices are that they are the only two models of smartphone that can be found in every outlet. Both handsets command ~40% of the U.S. market each. At this point, it would be dumb for a retailer to not carry iPhone.

Even when cdma is phased out it is not clear if Verizon is going to let non verizon phones on their network.

Posted via CB10

I dunno. Verizon has partnered with AT&T to build this next gen VoLTE network, and if you may have noticed, Verizon commericals and tweets are now typically pitted against Sprint and T-Mo, leaving AT&T out of it. Both Verizon and AT&T want interoperability between the two with this new network. Verizon ultamitly wants to sell you a service, not necessarily a handset.

[Plazmic Flame]

Verizon doesn't like it's customers, is anti-choice..... what do you think?

[Avenzuno]

Thanks for the update about the CDMA shutdown. To be clear, my point is in the past Verizon favored BlackBerry by offering its phones, but to date has given me one 10.3.2 update to my VZW Z30. But now, Big Red is biased against BlackBerry and in favor of Samsung. That is bad news for BlackBerry as Verizon is at its best in its home of the northeastern United States, which is the home of most of the company's enterprise and business customers. If BlackBerry truly wants those customers back, they must allow them to buy the new BlackBerry Android phones, beginning with Mercury perhaps, through Verizon channels. This exclusivity thing has never worked out for BlackBerry and they should just stop it already.

Posted via CB10 on my VZW  Z30 STA100-3 | 10.3.2.2813

[Ment]

Verizon made Google give them an exclusive for US carrier sales of the new announced Pixel. Given BB handset sales, I don't think Verizon even wants BB back but if they did they'd exact their pound of flesh from them from price to updates.

[thurask]

Verizon made Google give them an exclusive for US carrier sales of the new announced Pixel. Given BB handset sales, I don't think Verizon even wants BB back but if they did they'd exact their pound of flesh from them from price to updates.

Consider it repayment for the Storm?

[Ment]

Consider it repayment for the Storm?

Well a 100M in free services and product made a dent in that. Doubt institutional memory of the Storm figures into it tho.

[SurfGuy9]

I'm going to say about 90-95% chance.

[ggendel]

Verizon claims to do the most rigorous testing out there. The current rumor (or lie. Or truth) is that Verizon found an issue between Priv, MM, and Verizon's Advanced LTE, sent it back to BB for fixin', and now we are just waiting for further testing. .

Personally, I don't care anymore if it is true or false since I'm moving on. What I do care is that for almost 6 months Verizon provided no useful information. A simple, "someone is working on it" or "no one is working on it" would have gone a long way to bring clarity without committing to a date. All this time we only got responses which raised more questions than they answered. Stringing your customers on for 6 months is just bad form.

If they do the most rigorous testing then it should have been easy to fix. As a hardware, firmware, software developer I can attest that problems are easy to fix if you have a complete definition of a problem and a methodology to replicate it. Without this information, you end up spinning your wheels.

I wrote an integrated circuit fault simulator used around the world. One customer called to say it ran for 4 days and crashed. The customer was doing a secret government product and couldn't provide any information since I didn't have the proper clearance. I spent the next two weeks asking generic questions, "Do you have any bilateral transmission gates?", "Are you using feature X?", "Could you try this option?", and so on. I finally tracked down the bug, fixed it. I also gave them instructions which would reduce their run-time from 8 days to 6 hours. It was great detective work but if they had provided my initially requested information it would have taken 10 minutes instead of 2 weeks to fix.

Given that only Verizon had a problem with patches for the Priv, I consider their testing to be ad-hoc, sloppy, and undocumented.

Years ago I consulted and developed a QA strategy for AT&T. There was a company that was super-paranoid about delivering a buggy product (at least at that time). It was an eye opening experience.

[zephyr613]

Verizon made Google give them an exclusive for US carrier sales of the new announced Pixel. Given BB handset sales, I don't think Verizon even wants BB back but if they did they'd exact their pound of flesh from them from price to updates.

No they didn't. You can purchase it from Google themselves:

https://store.google.com/config/pixe...hone_Config_BN

Even has 24 month financing.

[ggendel]

Verizon doesn't like it's customers, is anti-choice..... what do you think?

I'm not sure it's anti-customer. I think Verizon thinks they are the 1000 pound gorilla. They treat their vendors equally as bad as they do customers. Look at what their CFO has been touting...
Verizon CFO: Silly People, You "Don't Need Unlimited Data" | Droid Life
CFO Admits Verizon Doesn't Care About Prepaid, Calls TracFone Verizon's Prepaid Product | Prepaid Phone News
https://www.techdirt.com/blog/wirele...-compete.shtml
Verizon Bids Good Riddance to Customers Leaving for a*Cheaper Deal - Bloomberg

[nycspaces.]

VZW sucks. If they won't support a product with reasonable efforts they should not sell it. At this point they are just arrogant and incompetent. I am with them out of laziness. I will switch on the next cycle. At this point Mercury will likely only be gsm and that will be the inflection point to change to ATT, no better but just as bad and less restrictive.

[tnewton3]

VZW sucks. If they won't support a product with reasonable efforts they should not sell it. At this point they are just arrogant and incompetent. I am with them out of laziness. I will switch on the next cycle. At this point Mercury will likely only be gsm and that will be the inflection point to change to ATT, no better but just as bad and less restrictive.

If you are living in a big city you won't really notice a difference in coverage. It's when you travel to rural areas that you will notice the difference.

I would love to have at&t but my lifestyle makes them unusable quite often.

[anon(8640806)]

The device isn't even out people :/ lol

Posted via CB10

[slagman5]

The device isn't even out people :/ lol

Posted via CB10

Well, to be fair to them, if this device was out they wouldn't be asking this question because then we'd all know whether it'll work on Verizon or not...

Posted without the aid of AutoCorrect with my physical keyboard via CB10

[crucial bbq]

If they do the most rigorous testing then it should have been easy to fix. As a hardware, firmware, software developer I can attest that problems are easy to fix if you have a complete definition of a problem and a methodology to replicate it. Without this information, you end up spinning your wheels.

I wrote an integrated circuit fault simulator used around the world. One customer called to say it ran for 4 days and crashed. The customer was doing a secret government product and couldn't provide any information since I didn't have the proper clearance. I spent the next two weeks asking generic questions, "Do you have any bilateral transmission gates?", "Are you using feature X?", "Could you try this option?", and so on. I finally tracked down the bug, fixed it. I also gave them instructions which would reduce their run-time from 8 days to 6 hours. It was great detective work but if they had provided my initially requested information it would have taken 10 minutes instead of 2 weeks to fix.

Given that only Verizon had a problem with patches for the Priv, I consider their testing to be ad-hoc, sloppy, and undocumented.

Years ago I consulted and developed a QA strategy for AT&T. There was a company that was super-paranoid about delivering a buggy product (at least at that time). It was an eye opening experience.

The No Service issue is something that has affected other carrier-locked Privs, not just those on AT&T. Is it not possible that Verizon found this bug early on? And if so, why is the onus on Verizon to fix it? To add, how long did it take BlackBerry to even address the issue let alone offer a solution? BlackBerry is the one who laid off a ton of devs, and did so at time when they were transitioning to Android. And is not BlackBerry's version of Marshmallow still in beta?

As to your other comment; you wrote that software and as such are intimately familiar with it both inside and out. That's not a fair comparison.

I am not making excuses for Verizon, btw. I, too, don't really care for them. But, I'm also not caring for BlackBerry anymore, either, because to me it seems obvious they are not on the ball, here, either.

[anon(9607753)]

Under the new strategy for hardware, isn't Verizon (if they even want a BlackBerry) supposed to license BlackBerry's name and build their own?

Looks like it's time for yet another Verizon petition...