04-18-09 02:25 PM
685 ... 1617181920 ...
tools
  1. anon(368121)'s Avatar
    I don't believe for a minute that Verizon needs to do anything to allow applications that work on any other BB to work on their network. That's not something you can just state without having some specific proof. Verizon, through their firmware, is preventing access to a piece of hardware. So unless you have proof to dispute the obvious, it doesn't make much sense just to say that Verizon needs to do anything to allow something that just works for everyone else.

    Not that I care that much since I have multiple GPS units, but the philosophical position that Verizon is still taking ticks me off.
    It's simple: Verizon requires that the GPS application provide the PDE server, port and authentication information; it's not information stored in the GPS chipset's NVRAM (it can be, but VZW chooses not to).

    Verizon doesn't share its PDE server address nor the security required to access it except to approved application vendors. It's their equipment, it's their bandwidth, so they're perfectly within their rights to control access to it. "Off the shelf" applications expect the device to handle the connection and authentication to the PDE automatically, but since VZW doesn't provide that information to the phone, they don't work.

    You can complain all you want that Verizon's firmware controls access to GPS . . . it's simply not true. Install Sprint's firmware on a VZW phone and you'll get the same results; no aGPS through Verizon. Install Verizon's firmware on a Sprint phone and aGPS will work fine on Sprint.

    I really don't care whether you believe me or not and don't feel a particular need to "prove" anything to you; the information on how access is restricted is publicly available. Google is your friend.
    03-12-09 03:55 PM
  2. TwinsX2Dad's Avatar
    There. Fixed that for ya
    Thanks! I am drugged today with an awful cold or something.

    I really don't care whether you believe me or not and don't feel a particular need to "prove" anything to you; the information on how access is restricted is publicly available. Google is your friend.
    It is your friend if you use discernment. Google (and other search engines) don't really care about truth. All of the anti-VZW flap is indexed too.

    What you said Dodge is dead-on. Anyone refuting it on their conspiracy-theory stands only illustrate they do not understand, nor do they care to demonstrate the intelligence level to understand.

    Have I mentioned lately that I have a Curve with a functional GPS chip? One of many Curves and the only one that works. How about the Storm with its fully functional chip? it is chip architecture & not any VZW conspiracy.

    An extra reason VZW doesn't allow unapproved third-party apps is privacy - something the "VZW IS REVEALING YOUR INFORMATION!" crowd doesn't want to admit, as it would shoot down that argument as well.
    03-12-09 04:06 PM
  3. anon(368121)'s Avatar
    Your analogy is flawed because the GPS doesn't require service from Verizon. Assisted GPS might use network information, but a GPS on its own doesn't require anything more then the taxpayer dollars we already pay to have the satellites in orbit that provide the GPS service to everyone.
    And this is the fundamental flaw in your reasoning. No CDMA Blackberries other than the Storm and a short run of Canadian-built 8330s produced during a chip shortage support anything but Assisted GPS. And Verizon doesn't provide open access to their aGPS infrastructure. Their towers, their servers, their right.
    Last edited by Dodge Deboulet; 03-12-09 at 04:13 PM.
    03-12-09 04:10 PM
  4. anon(368121)'s Avatar
    Google (and other search engines) don't really care about truth. All of the anti-VZW flap is indexed too.
    Ok, Google is your Mercenary . . . that works for free (well other than consuming your soul)
    Last edited by Dodge Deboulet; 03-12-09 at 04:22 PM.
    03-12-09 04:18 PM
  5. gotblackberry's Avatar
    How's the lawsuit coming? I still haven't seen a copy..
    03-12-09 05:26 PM
  6. ncbfc1's Avatar
    I just read all 29 pages of this "War and Peace" epic and have found it amusing.
    I think we are forgetting that the only reason GPS chips were installed originally and that was for 911 service. A feature designed to help save lives, not give me turn by turn directions to the nearest Starbucks.
    The fact that BB Maps which is a Blackberry specific program, designed to work with Blackberry devices now works on Verizon seems to be lost on some people.
    I just wanted to thank everyone that has posted on this thread for the last hour of enjoyment that I received.
    03-12-09 06:43 PM
  7. Jim from NW Pa's Avatar
    And this is the fundamental flaw in your reasoning. No CDMA Blackberries other than the Storm and a short run of Canadian-built 8330s produced during a chip shortage support anything but Assisted GPS. And Verizon doesn't provide open access to their aGPS infrastructure. Their towers, their servers, their right.
    Thank you sir

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    03-12-09 08:55 PM
  8. TwinsX2Dad's Avatar
    I just read all 29 pages of this "War and Peace" epic and have found it amusing.
    I think we are forgetting that the only reason GPS chips were installed originally and that was for 911 service. A feature designed to help save lives, not give me turn by turn directions to the nearest Starbucks.
    The fact that BB Maps which is a Blackberry specific program, designed to work with Blackberry devices now works on Verizon seems to be lost on some people.
    I just wanted to thank everyone that has posted on this thread for the last hour of enjoyment that I received.
    It was crafted with much enjoyment, blood, sweat, tears & frustrations, just for everyone's enjoyment.

    Check back in next week after we've added several more pages.
    03-12-09 10:23 PM
  9. evknotts21's Avatar
    Funny thing is if you want to be pissed about the whole thing, Blackberry is who you should be pissed at. Go take a look at the website for the Curve and read it carefully and check the footnote. Don't be pissed at Verizon because you didn't do your homework. It clearly states you have to consult your provider and that it uses 3rd party programs.
    03-18-09 08:54 PM
  10. tims4789's Avatar
    wow, dont feel like reading all 30 pages. does this remind anyone else of the OBEX OPP issues with the v710? LOL dont feel like goin there again.
    03-18-09 09:27 PM
  11. muygordo's Avatar
    According to his article entitled "New firmware unlocks GPS on Verizon-branded Pearls and Curves, carrier's intentions unclear", Jacob Schulman reported on Dec 5th 2008 at 12:31AM:
    "If you've been itching to get your GPS on but weren't feelin' the $9.99 monthly charge for VZ Navigator, today is a good day. Verizon 8330 Curve and 8130 Pearl devices have finally been (somewhat) decrippled, as users over at HowardForums are reporting that the GPS in the aforementioned devices started working once they applied the 4.5.0.97 update. As this is an unreleased firmware version, we're unsure if this was an intentional measure, or simply an epic mistake. But one thing we're sure about is that if Verizon does shut this down in the next firmware update, the backlash will surely be enough to whip up one heck of a Storm. Unfortunately at this point, it's only working in BlackBerry Maps, while Google Maps is left out of the party; but hey, we'll take whatever we can get."

    That's probably only for Verizon customers. Alltel's customers using 'Blackberries' will have to continue to pay approximately $10.00 per month for a feature they were led to believe was included in the cost of an 8330 and their monthly subscription.
    03-25-09 08:11 PM
  12. mendymendy's Avatar
    Going back to the op's statement, yes they advertised it as being GPS capable, but I don't recall reading anything about it being "FREE", do you?
    If a reasonable person expects that there is no additional charge for GPS, then yes, they are required to disclose the price. GPS is not a fee-based service. It's a built-in capability that can access the GPS satellite system at no charge. Verizon went ahead and BLOCKED this feature.

    If Verizon decided to block Facebook and charge a fee to access it, would you still say, "Yes, they advertised it as having internet access, but I don't recall anything about Facebook being FREE"?
    03-29-09 06:18 PM
  13. John Yester's Avatar
    No, but to use facebook or any internet application you would need a data plan Which is required with verizon.
    03-29-09 07:26 PM
  14. mendymendy's Avatar
    Even if it does make it into court, by that time you'll probably be onto another blackberry, or verizon may unlock GPS by then. Besides, say you win, all you'll see is a few bucks and they will still lock the GPS. But if you have nothing better to do...
    You sound like you're going through the rationale of the person who masterminded this scheme to bilk the public out of millions of dollars in ill-gotten gains: "Ah! By the time these little guys try to something about, they will just get over it and move on to another scam we have waiting for them".

    Thankfully, we live in a society of laws, and have something called a class-action lawsuit that prevents companies from keeping the booty they plundered from customers.

    I personally own shares in Verizon Communications, and I don't like to see them have to pay out millions to settle suits that were brought on as the result of certain executives who use the corporation to rip off customers and increase their bonuses. The GPS blocking activity is nothing short of deceptive business practices, if not outright fraud.

    I hope that Verizon will do the right thing and fire those responsible and withhold their bonuses, which frankly belong to us as customers and shareholders.
    03-29-09 07:36 PM
  15. mendymendy's Avatar
    That is just one of the items related to Microsoft.

    So lets take what you just posted. Verizon is preventing any 3rd part y application (free or paid service) from running on a device because they explicitly prevent it. That is exactly the same as you wrote above.

    Imagine buying a notebook from Dell and either not being able to get on free wifi with the wireless card that is part of the laptop without paying dell to enable the wifi. That's exactly what is happening here. Verizon is taking a function of the device that is provided in what we purchased (wifi card) which requires no Verizon service to function (free wifi) and requiring us to pay to use something that is free and has no ongoing cost to them.

    And to take it a step further, what if you paid the $10 and found out you can only use their web browser and not anyone you wanted? That's comparing to Verizon paying $10/mo and using VZNav and not any other nav program we might choose to use.

    I'm trying to make this something you can relate to that isn't just Verizon and the GPS. Imagine how, if you cared about something else like wifi, you'd relate to what Verizon is doing on the Blackberry.

    Exactly!

    By blocking 3rd party GPS applications, Verizon is engaging in anti-competitive practices!!

    If you rememebr in the case of United States v. Microsoft, the allegation was NOT that Microsoft was disabling other browsers from working, but rather that it's giving its own browser away for free to keep competitors at bay. Verizon is clearly going way beyond that and purposly blocking 3rd party software! They are criminals!
    03-29-09 07:47 PM
  16. TwinsX2Dad's Avatar
    If a reasonable person expects that there is no additional charge for GPS, then yes, they are required to disclose the price. GPS is not a fee-based service. It's a built-in capability that can access the GPS satellite system at no charge. Verizon went ahead and BLOCKED this feature.

    If Verizon decided to block Facebook and charge a fee to access it, would you still say, "Yes, they advertised it as having internet access, but I don't recall anything about Facebook being FREE"?
    Your premise is wrong. If you go back in this thread, you will find that it is aGPS and that aGPS REQUIRES network interactivity to operate. The "a" is "assisted" and will NOT work on its own. It is not a dual-mode GPS chip, like the one on the Storm and it is either off or it is on - there is no functionality for any software intervention in between. If there were some form of locking, whether in the OS or the firmware, why hasn't anyone been able to hack it? And why is it that running Sprint, USCellular or any other carrier software doesn't "unlock" it?

    I have two VZW 8330 Curves that I use on a regular basis. One is special, as it came with a dual-mode GPS chip in it. I can run Garmin, GoogleMaps & MapQuest, without a puck, and it works flawlessly. 2-3 meter accuracy on it. The other requires a puck. Both are running the same firmware & OS and both are on VZW. Why is one of them not "blocked" or "locked" as you assert?

    Then there is your assertion that VZW advertised the phones as being GPS capable. In every ad, each publication, there is a disclaimer. It is a similar disclaimer to those advertised on the AT&T site for a variety of phones from Moto, Nokia, etc.

    Why would a "reasonable person" think their BlackBerry with aGPS should work any differently than a Razr on AT&T with a similar aGPS chip? The legal departments of RIM, VZW, LG, Motorola, AT&T, Samsung, HTC, etc. must all be wrong while you are correct, I guess.

    Your reasoning is not that of a reasonable person. Your comparison of Facebook & GPS functionality is like me throwing a fit because I cannot take a Piper Apache drive to work. In reality, your argument is like the guy who buys a Toyota RAV4, then gets mad because it can't run the Rubicon - gee, they TOLD me it had 4WD and could go offroad! Toyota need to stop their false advertising! Let's start a class action suit!

    I remember a few dolts who bought Acura NSX sports cars, who then sued Honda/Yokohama because they were only getting 8000 miles on a set of tires - the same dolts who were then given longer-lasting tires, but then threw a fit over the fact their NSX didn't handle as well with the new tires. Never mind the fact that Yokohama A-008 tires are still one of the top choices for performance drivers and similar tires from other manufacturers have similar treadlife.

    In the Toyota scenario, it would take a complete redesign of the RAV4. It is, after all, based on a front-wheel-drive car. With the NSX, it was unreasonable expectations - something that is common when you bring supercar performance to the masses at a price they can afford. Similar tires on Porsche, Lamborghini & Ferarri last - oops - about 8000 miles.

    You want a Curve with a dual-mode GPS? VZW has already shown on many models (both RIM and non-RIM) that GPS is open. On the Curve, it would take a redesign, incorporating the new chip, and probably a price increase, as dual-mode chips cost 2-3 times what a single-mode costs.

    If you want full-blown GPS on VZW, it isn't VZW's fault you chose the wrong device to do it.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    03-29-09 08:14 PM
  17. TwinsX2Dad's Avatar
    Exactly!

    By blocking 3rd party GPS applications, Verizon is engaging in anti-competitive practices!!

    If you rememebr in the case of United States v. Microsoft, the allegation was NOT that Microsoft was disabling other browsers from working, but rather that it's giving its own browser away for free to keep competitors at bay. Verizon is clearly going way beyond that and purposly blocking 3rd party software! They are criminals!

    Yet another bad analogy.

    Netscape and governments sued Microsoft, not the end user.

    Another issue with your analogy is it isn't apples to apples. It isn't VZW's operating system. It is RIM's. I've yet to see a single court action against any ISP over HP computers running Windows & IE.

    Oh but wait - maybe your analogy has something! Maybe I can sue Cox, Qwest & Comcast for not allowing me to run Internet servers, streaming audio/video or bit-Torrent sites on their services! Gee, my computers have the capability - and I have the knowledge to to run them - but my local Internet provider, analogous to VZW being my cell provider, BLOCKS these things! They have me locked out of using things my computer is capable of! Wow, thanks for the idea - after all, they do give me UNLIMITED Internet access, so WHY can't I run these things from my computers?

    Maybe because it is THEIR network and not mine.

    It seems to be only fools who keep reviving this issue.
    03-29-09 08:39 PM
  18. MYQX56RULES's Avatar
    Your premise is wrong. If you go back in this thread, you will find that it is aGPS and that aGPS REQUIRES network interactivity to operate. The "a" is "assisted" and will NOT work on its own. It is not a dual-mode GPS chip, like the one on the Storm and it is either off or it is on - there is no functionality for any software intervention in between. If there were some form of locking, whether in the OS or the firmware, why hasn't anyone been able to hack it? And why is it that running Sprint, USCellular or any other carrier software doesn't "unlock" it?

    I have two VZW 8330 Curves that I use on a regular basis. One is special, as it came with a dual-mode GPS chip in it. I can run Garmin, GoogleMaps & MapQuest, without a puck, and it works flawlessly. 2-3 meter accuracy on it. The other requires a puck. Both are running the same firmware & OS and both are on VZW. Why is one of them not "blocked" or "locked" as you assert?

    Then there is your assertion that VZW advertised the phones as being GPS capable. In every ad, each publication, there is a disclaimer. It is a similar disclaimer to those advertised on the AT&T site for a variety of phones from Moto, Nokia, etc.

    Why would a "reasonable person" think their BlackBerry with aGPS should work any differently than a Razr on AT&T with a similar aGPS chip? The legal departments of RIM, VZW, LG, Motorola, AT&T, Samsung, HTC, etc. must all be wrong while you are correct, I guess.

    Your reasoning is not that of a reasonable person. Your comparison of Facebook & GPS functionality is like me throwing a fit because I cannot take a Piper Apache drive to work. In reality, your argument is like the guy who buys a Toyota RAV4, then gets mad because it can't run the Rubicon - gee, they TOLD me it had 4WD and could go offroad! Toyota need to stop their false advertising! Let's start a class action suit!

    I remember a few dolts who bought Acura NSX sports cars, who then sued Honda/Yokohama because they were only getting 8000 miles on a set of tires - the same dolts who were then given longer-lasting tires, but then threw a fit over the fact their NSX didn't handle as well with the new tires. Never mind the fact that Yokohama A-008 tires are still one of the top choices for performance drivers and similar tires from other manufacturers have similar treadlife.

    In the Toyota scenario, it would take a complete redesign of the RAV4. It is, after all, based on a front-wheel-drive car. With the NSX, it was unreasonable expectations - something that is common when you bring supercar performance to the masses at a price they can afford. Similar tires on Porsche, Lamborghini & Ferarri last - oops - about 8000 miles.

    You want a Curve with a dual-mode GPS? VZW has already shown on many models (both RIM and non-RIM) that GPS is open. On the Curve, it would take a redesign, incorporating the new chip, and probably a price increase, as dual-mode chips cost 2-3 times what a single-mode costs.

    If you want full-blown GPS on VZW, it isn't VZW's fault you chose the wrong device to do it.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    WOW...
    03-29-09 08:45 PM
  19. TwinsX2Dad's Avatar
    I type all of that & all you have is...
    WOW...
    I am crushed, I tell ya. CRUSHED!

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    03-29-09 11:23 PM
  20. mendymendy's Avatar
    Yet another bad analogy.

    Netscape and governments sued Microsoft, not the end user.

    Another issue with your analogy is it isn't apples to apples. It isn't VZW's operating system. It is RIM's. I've yet to see a single court action against any ISP over HP computers running Windows & IE.

    Oh but wait - maybe your analogy has something! Maybe I can sue Cox, Qwest & Comcast for not allowing me to run Internet servers, streaming audio/video or bit-Torrent sites on their services! Gee, my computers have the capability - and I have the knowledge to to run them - but my local Internet provider, analogous to VZW being my cell provider, BLOCKS these things! They have me locked out of using things my computer is capable of! Wow, thanks for the idea - after all, they do give me UNLIMITED Internet access, so WHY can't I run these things from my computers?

    Maybe because it is THEIR network and not mine.

    It seems to be only fools who keep reviving this issue.
    My analogy is very good, excuse me! First of all, it has nothing to do with whose operating system the phone runs on. The analogy is good if you just apply common sense and a bit of critical thinking. You seem to be thrown off the logic track because the names of the companies aren't the same.

    Second, ISP are indeed not allowed to block you from using streaming audio and video or bit torrent sites. You pay for the bandwidth - they are required to provide it. Speaking of bad analogies.... geez, what does bandwidth have to do with this debate?!?
    03-30-09 09:23 AM
  21. mendymendy's Avatar
    Funny thing is if you want to be pissed about the whole thing, Blackberry is who you should be pissed at. Go take a look at the website for the Curve and read it carefully and check the footnote. Don't be pissed at Verizon because you didn't do your homework. It clearly states you have to consult your provider and that it uses 3rd party programs.
    It is clear now that Verizon is at fault. They have recently opened GPS to BlackBerry Maps, but not to Google Maps. This makes it clear that they possess the blocking powers and are exercising them in violation of U.S. anti-trust laws. RIM is not apparently doing the blocking.
    03-30-09 09:27 AM
  22. anon(368121)'s Avatar
    It is clear now that Verizon is at fault. They have recently opened GPS to BlackBerry Maps, but not to Google Maps. This makes it clear that they possess the blocking powers and are exercising them in violation of U.S. anti-trust laws. RIM is not apparently doing the blocking.
    The only thing blocked is access to Verizon's PDE (Position Determining Entity) servers, which are Verizon-owned hardware. BBMaps has been equipped with the authentication mechanism to access them, and non-RIM applications (other than those provided by VZW) have not. Access to the PDE servers is required for aGPS, and no CDMA Blackberry's GPS (other than the Storm's) works without PDE support.

    I've posted a couple of times in this thread regarding the GPS functionality provided by Verizon. Please do a search and I think you'll find that, given the mechanism used, Verizon is completely within their legal rights to prohibit access to their equipment.
    03-30-09 09:47 AM
  23. TwinsX2Dad's Avatar
    Second, ISP are indeed not allowed to block you from using streaming audio and video or bit torrent sites. You pay for the bandwidth - they are required to provide it. Speaking of bad analogies.... geez, what does bandwidth have to do with this debate?!?
    You may want to go to the sites for AT&T (local broadband), Verizon (local broadband), Qwest, Cox & Comcast - you'll see you're wrong. Of course you won't, because your kind believes that you saying it makes it true.

    You've failed to post an apples to apples analogy yet and Dodge (above) summarized the GPS issue perfectly.

    Maybe you should address the verifiable points made instead of your own misleading talking points.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    03-30-09 12:10 PM
  24. n7okn's Avatar
    Just for the record, I was in the "Verizon Sucks" crowd, but learning about the aGPS vs dual mode GPS, I agree with Verizon. If Verizon is providing servers to aid in GPS positioning, they should be able to charge for it. However, it would make sense from a public relations standpoint to go ahead and open it as part of the cost of doing business. Even make it a selling point to get more customers. At least it would quiet the malcontents.
    03-31-09 01:05 AM
  25. anon(368121)'s Avatar
    Maybe you should address the verifiable points made instead of your own misleading talking points.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    You know, I doubt that will happen. The thread will just go dormant for a while, until another under-informed individual decides to take up the "free my GPS!" torch.

    And we'll be back, to inform and abuse
    03-31-09 04:01 PM
685 ... 1617181920 ...
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD