[JaydePhoenix]

Why does AT&T usually get better phones before Verizon (if ever) does?

I travel for a living and have had both carriers. AT&T is an awesome service to have in highly populated areas (both for the service and the amenities you get). But close to 90% of our country is considered "rural" (which is where most of my travels take me) and AT&T is severely lacking in these areas. Now, I don't know the subscriber count for each service but from what I've seen and heard in my travels, Verizon has a larger customer base than AT&T does. I would absolutely LOVE to have the torch (having both that large of a screen AND a keypad makes me giddy just thinking about it!) but there's NO WAY I would go back to AT&T from Verizon, considering all the dead spots I had back when I was with AT&T. So, if I want the most up to date BB without switching I get the "Style"? Should have been named the "No-Style" as no self-respecting BB user would be seen carrying such a horrible looking phone.

[Spiral_ouT]

Verizon usually never gets phones that AT&T does. AT&T is a GSM carrier and VZW is CDMA. GSM phones don't work on a CDMA networks. Companies have to make completely different devices for CDMA networks.

VZW has the Storm and a large selection of Android devices that AT&T doesn't offer.

AT&T received the Torch first because they worked with RIM on designing it.

[ridesno159]

It's all subjective...

I don't like the Torch at all, slider phones are dumb, and no self-respecting BB user would be seen with that. But I also agree that the BlackBerry flip thing is dumb too.

I love my Storm, and Att doesn't have that. I prefer the 96XX form over the 9700, and I hate the iPhone. If I were to get an Android phone it would be the Incredible, Att's Android offerings are pathetic compared to Verizon. So I think that Verizon gets the better phones compared to Att.

But, with all that said, it's in the best interest of the consumer to pick the carrier that works best for them, then choose a phone. If you do it the other way around is when you run into issues like you mentioned.

So do you really think your question is going to get answered or is this more of a just a rant?

[Exiled Bulldawg]

Because AT&T uses GSM, which is the most prevalent cellular system in the world. VZW uses CDMA. CDMA isn't used in nearly as many places, accordingly, the market for handsets is much smaller and not as many handsets are made. As of right now, VZW has about 92.1 million customers. AT&T has about 90.1 million.

According to wikipedia, Verizon spends about $8 billion a year on its network. AT&T Wireless is playing catch up with its network, spending billions (read somewhere its about $17 billion this year,) but that is one push to increase capacity to match traffic and it still has more dropped calls and other network problems. VZW will have a 4G LTE network in 25-30 markets by 12/31/2010. AT&T isn't starting its roll out until mid 2011. VZW will have a 4G footprint the size of its current 3G footprint by 2013.

[chuckh0308]

I can never figure out where these threads come from...lol! Verizon has a MUCH better selection of phones than AT&T right now. Not even the Jesus phone can top what VZW has right now and will have within the next few weeks. Plus (and people forget this part) VZW has the Bold 9650 and Storm 9550, which are both World phones and work on CDMA AND GSM. Soon there will be Droid world phones too on VZW, then LTE, then...

[JaydePhoenix]

Mainly just a rant, most of the phones that I have liked over the last few years have been AT&T and it seems like Verizon gets the "rejected ideas" that AT&T didn't like. I've tried most of the ones that have came out since I joined verizon, messaging phones like the ENVy and its offspring, the voyager (which was HORRIBLE), the entertainment phones like the chocolate, and I always keep falling back on the BB, even though I've never cared for most of them. I might just be too picky and always see the greener grass on the other side...

And, Spiral, the difference between GSM and CDMA has nothing to do with my OP, I'm well aware of that difference, nor with why they produce one kind of phone and not another. You can design a phone to work on any network, hence the reason I'm currently using a tour.

Which is why I stick with Verizon, dawg.

[Spiral_ouT]

Mainly just a rant, most of the phones that I have liked over the last few years have been AT&T and it seems like Verizon gets the "rejected ideas" that AT&T didn't like. I've tried most of the ones that have came out since I joined verizon, messaging phones like the ENVy and its offspring, the voyager (which was HORRIBLE), the entertainment phones like the chocolate, and I always keep falling back on the BB, even though I've never cared for most of them. I might just be too picky and always see the greener grass on the other side...

And, Spiral, the difference between GSM and CDMA has nothing to do with my OP, I'm well aware of that difference, nor with why they produce one kind of phone and not another. You can design a phone to work on any network, hence the reason I'm currently using a tour.

Which is why I stick with Verizon, dawg.

GSM phones are usually made first since there is a better market for them. So yes, it would affect why VZW doesn't usually get the first series of a new phone. People who don't know these things usually don't know the difference between GSM and CDMA, so I thought I would drop a small amount of info on the subject.

It seems you are comparing the Blackberry Smartphone to multimedia phones. Maybe you should try out a different smartphone like an Android or Palm device. They are more comparable to a Blackberry.

[tjmonsen5]

One thing I like about having AT&T is that it has the wireless hotspots all around. I guess it isnt a really big deal since I have 2GB per month data usage, but edge isnt very fast. It was nice when I walked into a Barnes and Noble and noticed that my phone was on wifi and said AT&T hotspot! Im pretty sure its free to use, since it connected automatically.

You are right about verizon having better service in rural areas. My phone works GREAT everywhere except in my house. I cannot go in my basement with the phone, and i need to leave it out on a table for it to keep signal. Otherwise, it seems to work just fine anywhere else.

[daspollak]

Most phones that are exclusive to Verizon usually have GSM counterparts somewhere in the world. AT&T users can buy unlocked phones and pop in their SIM. It is a nice luxury if you can drop $600-800 for a phone.

[WhoolioPreludee]

Really? Because in my opinion att has pretty crappy phones. Yes in the past vzw has old people devices but that's no longer the case

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

[mark_rivers19]

except for the iphone... i see AT&T and Verizon as having the same amount of phones.. there are good ones and then there are the crappy ones

[LuvMyBB]

It's all subjective...

I don't like the Torch at all, slider phones are dumb, and no self-respecting BB user would be seen with that.

Wow. I've waded through many ignorant posts on CB, but this one may just take the cake.

[LuvMyBB]

In the areas I personally have traveled, when carrying both a Verizon work phone (numerous) and AT&T personal phone (numerous), my AT&T phones had MUCH better coverage in rural areas. It wasn't even close. Where you travel may be different, of course.

In thick-walled buildings (steel and concrete) Verizon/CDMA fared better.

[ridesno159]

Wow. I've waded through many ignorant posts on CB, but this one may just take the cake.

So you just ignored the OP's quote when they said the same thing about the 9670? Or do you just disagree with what I said?

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

[LuvMyBB]

So you just ignored the OP's quote when they said the same thing about the 9670? Or do you just disagree with what I said?

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

No, guess I missed his last sentence. I would say the same thing about that.

Basically, I don't like sweeping generalizations, especially when based on something as subjective (just as you said) as people's tastes in mobile devices.

[mark_rivers19]

Let's talk about the "objective " part of this debate..
unless my math is wrong.. Verizon plans cost more than AT&T.. ($5-10/month)
i'm talking about voice plans and the mobile broadband plans..
also the rollover minutes.. is with AT&T only.

[ridesno159]

Let's talk about the "objective " part of this debate..
unless my math is wrong.. Verizon plans cost more than AT&T.. ($5-10/month)
i'm talking about voice plans and the mobile broadband plans..
also the rollover minutes.. is with AT&T only.

Not necessarily true... Or at least the discounts Verizon gives are much better than Att. I'm have a family plan (4 lines). We switched about a year ago from Att to Verizon, added two data plans (3 total), and I'm actually saving 5 bucks a month on Verizon. Same job for the discounts, just Att's were very minimal, it was like 5% or something dumb.

Verizon doesn't use tiered data plans either, so if your a power user who uses more than 2GB of data a month then it will cost much more on Att.

Verizon also has a much bigger network compared to Att. Try using Att in northern Minnesota or anywhere in Montana, and you'll gladly pay that supposedly extra 5 bucks a month for stress-free calling.

I never got the point of rollover minutes either. 95% of cell phone users use roughly the same amount of minutes every month, give or take a some. So you need a plan that will provide you enough minutes so you don't have a chance of going over. This creates lots and lots of rollover minutes that most likely will never get used. They won't even allow you to switch to a lower minute plan so you can use those rollover minutes.

So really, your objective reasoning just turned subjective because of all the points I mentioned above don't apply to everyone. As I said before, people pick the carrier that works best for them, then they choose the phone, or at least that's how it should be done.

[TheScionicMan]

CDMA is a proprietary technology, so they have to wait for Qualcomm to provide the chips. I think GSM is usually ahead of the game in that arena, as there are more providers (5 or so, IIRC)

[Jude526]

The Bold 9650 is a great device on Verizon. And the resolution is much better than that of the Torch

[breakmedown]

Not necessarily true... Or at least the discounts Verizon gives are much better than Att. I'm have a family plan (4 lines). We switched about a year ago from Att to Verizon, added two data plans (3 total), and I'm actually saving 5 bucks a month on Verizon. Same job for the discounts, just Att's were very minimal, it was like 5% or something dumb.

Verizon doesn't use tiered data plans either, so if your a power user who uses more than 2GB of data a month then it will cost much more on Att.

Verizon also has a much bigger network compared to Att. Try using Att in northern Minnesota or anywhere in Montana, and you'll gladly pay that supposedly extra 5 bucks a month for stress-free calling.

I never got the point of rollover minutes either. 95% of cell phone users use roughly the same amount of minutes every month, give or take a some. So you need a plan that will provide you enough minutes so you don't have a chance of going over. This creates lots and lots of rollover minutes that most likely will never get used. They won't even allow you to switch to a lower minute plan so you can use those rollover minutes.

So really, your objective reasoning just turned subjective because of all the points I mentioned above don't apply to everyone. As I said before, people pick the carrier that works best for them, then they choose the phone, or at least that's how it should be done.

You didn't turn any of his points into "subjective" points you simply asserted your opinion of them. You even said it yourself, the plans are (generally) cheaper and there's no way to deny that AT&T has rollover minutes and nobody else does. Facts don't change because of how you feel about them.

Verizon is rumored to be going to tiered plans relatively soon too. There's been no official word though many speculate this is only a matter of time.

Rollover minutes are unlikely to be used, yeah. A couple years back, however, my family was saved by them. My sister got married and our 3 phone plan went nearly 1,000 minutes over and didn't have to pay anything because of rollover. So I'd rather sleep safely knowing if for some reason I need more minutes I'm not paying dearly for them.

Carrier and phone debates are nearly totally subjective because not everybody wants and needs the same things in the same place. So every network and phone has strong facts to back them, but whether that's what you want is subjective.

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

[ridesno159]

You didn't turn any of his points into "subjective" points you simply asserted your opinion of them. You even said it yourself, the plans are (generally) cheaper and there's no way to deny that AT&T has rollover minutes and nobody else does. Facts don't change because of how you feel about them.

Verizon is rumored to be going to tiered plans relatively soon too. There's been no official word though many speculate this is only a matter of time.

Rollover minutes are unlikely to be used, yeah. A couple years back, however, my family was saved by them. My sister got married and our 3 phone plan went nearly 1,000 minutes over and didn't have to pay anything because of rollover. So I'd rather sleep safely knowing if for some reason I need more minutes I'm not paying dearly for them.

Carrier and phone debates are nearly totally subjective because not everybody wants and needs the same things in the same place. So every network and phone has strong facts to back them, but whether that's what you want is subjective.

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

Huh? It's all subjective, what you said makes no sense. Att's plans can be cheaper cash wise, but if you factor in all the points I listed then they're more expensive. Paying $25 for 2GB of data is much more expensive then paying $30 for unlimited data. Sure there's rumored tiered data plans for Verizon, but there's also been a rumored Verizon iPhone for how long now? And if rollover minutes were such a great thing then other carriers would offer them. If you're looking for a cheap plan then go to Tmobile or Sprint.

And yes, facts do change when you look at them from an objective point of view. Facts and statistics are useless without something to compare them to.

[breakmedown]

It's not all subjective. An objective fact is that the 3G network of Verizon is bigger. It's also a fact that AT&T's network is faster. What is subjective is your preference of those 2 things.

There is such a small minority of people that actually go over 2 GB it's nearly erroneous to say it's cheaper. It may be cheaper for a couple people, but for the overwhelming masses it's not. Even just $25 vs $30 is cheaper. Not to mention that (according to AT&T) 85% of people could get away with the $15 plan. For the similar "power users" I'm sure you could get an unlimited talk plan, rendering rollover useless.

Facts are not useless without something to compare them to. Stats are no different. Without comparing them to anything, the fact that 85% or people with a data plan on AT&T use less than 200MB of data says plenty and is factual data. The part that is subjective is whether or not that saves them money.

Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

[ridesno159]

Verizon's 3G network is larger, compared to what? The world or Att?
Att's network is faster, compared to what? Verizon or my home wifi network?
$25 is less than $30, you're correct. But if a person uses 3GB a month then which carrier is cheaper?
A fact, according to Att, is 85% of people with a data plan use less than 200MB/month. So does that include the people with multimedia phones that you can be on "the web" constantly for a whole month and use 30MB of data? Or is that strictly smartphone users?

As I said before, facts are useless without something to compare them to. So you can take the facts/features and compare them to how you'll use them in the real world, making it all subjective.