04-18-09 02:25 PM
685 ... 34567 ...
tools
  1. dredayholiday's Avatar
    You aren't getting the concept here. We're not disputing the fact that VZ is within their right to charge for VZNav. We're disputing the fact that the GPS HW device in our Blackberry's is crippled by VZ so it only works with their application after paying a fee. Uncripple the HW and charge $10/mo for VZ Nav. No one would then care as there are competitive solutions that would be available. But with the GPS crippled by Verizon, there's no competition.

    If the above makes sense, then you'll understand the discussion. If not, I'm not sure how to explain it any clearer then already has been done.

    VZNav - pay is ok. GPS crippled by Verizon - not ok.

    I understand that, but then it wouldn't be effective to charge, which in turn just equals free GPS, which in the end is what some want...that's why people want it uncrippled. The only reason they want other options is because they want GPS for free. Again, the costs is what people don't like. I really don't see a lawsuit changing anything. VZW does not have a monopoly on cellphones. We are free to choose which phone and provider we desire. In the end we will pay. Even if they did free the GPS, you'll pay in another way. They will get their money regardless, and I really have yet to see a good reason why a court of law would make this company change their policies.
    11-29-08 02:14 PM
  2. GeekNJ's Avatar
    I understand that, but then it wouldn't be effective to charge, which in turn just equals free GPS, which in the end is what some want...that's why people want it uncrippled. The only reason they want other options is because they want GPS for free. Again, the costs is what people don't like. I really don't see a lawsuit changing anything. VZW does not have a monopoly on cellphones. We are free to choose which phone and provider we desire. In the end we will pay. Even if they did free the GPS, you'll pay in another way. They will get their money regardless, and I really have yet to see a good reason why a court of law would make this company change their policies.
    Sorry, but you are still lost/confused. The GPS is HW and part of the physical device we all purchased. It wasn't free - we bought it. In order to use the HW device we purchased, Verizon requires us to subscribe to their navigation program. I don't want their navigation program for free. I don't want their navigation program at all. I want the GPS which I already pay for to function as it comes from the HW manufacturer.

    And I could care less about a lawsuit. I want the GPS un-crippled.

    And as fae as switching, read the past posts in this thread - maybe it will sink in.
    11-29-08 02:19 PM
  3. dredayholiday's Avatar
    Sorry, but you are still lost/confused. The GPS is HW and part of the physical device we all purchased. It wasn't free - we bought it. In order to use the HW device we purchased, Verizon requires us to subscribe to their navigation program. I don't want their navigation program for free. I don't want their navigation program at all. I want the GPS which I already pay for to function as it comes from the HW manufacturer.

    And I could care less about a lawsuit. I want the GPS un-crippled.

    And as fae as switching, read the past posts in this thread - maybe it will sink in.


    If a car company decides that they want to charge extra for me to use the radio inside the car...you know what? I don't buy their car. It's that simple. I don't purchase the car because it gets better gas mileage and then complain I have to pay to use the radio that is inside it. Yes, we purchased the phone with a GPS receiver built in. However, RIM is not our service provider, they're a smartphone manufacturer. The only way I could see you having viable complaint, is if you purchased the phone directly from RIM, and then VZW disabled the GPS. Then again...no, no that wouldn't work, because you are asking VZW for their services... and that is a stipulation of receiving those services. It comes down to force. You can't want a company to change something about itself, when you ask them to provide you with such and such a service... especially a service that you do not have to receive from them. VZW will continue to charge for GPS, because there is no real reason for them not to.
    11-29-08 02:37 PM
  4. GeekNJ's Avatar
    You can't want a company to change something about itself, when you ask them to provide you with such and such a service... especially a service that you do not have to receive from them. VZW will continue to charge for GPS, because there is no real reason for them not to.
    Sorry, but you're confusing the difference between the GPS and the Verizon supplied navigation service that uses the GPS that is in the device we each purchased.

    I'm done trying to explain the difference to you.
    11-29-08 02:53 PM
  5. vndlewis's Avatar
    Your burger analogy is wrong. It would be more like buying a McDonalds burger that comes with ketchup and pickles and finding out you have to go back to the counter and pay more money to get the ketchup. The BB comes with a GPS, yet we are prevented from using it without paying more.
    I have been to burger places that charge for the condiments. One McDonalds has 2 hash browns for $1 and another has 1 hash brown for $1.

    McDonalds has ranch for the Chicken McNuggets but charges me for my ranch with my burger. So everyone needs to file a class action suit against McDonalds. The GPS on the STORM is disabled, but is crippled on the other BBs. Oh my.
    11-29-08 03:47 PM
  6. RicanMedic78's Avatar
    If a car company decides that they want to charge extra for me to use the radio inside the car...you know what? I don't buy their car. It's that simple. I don't purchase the car because it gets better gas mileage and then complain I have to pay to use the radio that is inside it. Yes, we purchased the phone with a GPS receiver built in. However, RIM is not our service provider, they're a smartphone manufacturer. The only way I could see you having viable complaint, is if you purchased the phone directly from RIM, and then VZW disabled the GPS. Then again...no, no that wouldn't work, because you are asking VZW for their services... and that is a stipulation of receiving those services. It comes down to force. You can't want a company to change something about itself, when you ask them to provide you with such and such a service... especially a service that you do not have to receive from them. VZW will continue to charge for GPS, because there is no real reason for them not to.
    bro, your arguement sounds like the basic political arguement on capitolism and free market choices. Basically your of the notion that if u dont like it, dont buy it, let the market readjust accordingly.... right?

    what your not understanding is that when you talk about "a monopoly," that is the term used to unfairly cripple the free market system in order to benefit the company implimenting the tactics that monopolizes the particular industry. Free markets dont fix this and if tactics are used unfairly to cripple competition, sometimes people will deal with it for whatever reasons. So knowing this, if a company chooses to go this route knowing full well that most will accept the finger in the **** hole, they will deal.

    Therefore the monopoly wins and the only loser is the consumer. And there are regulations to stop this from happening! Its the same reason a company just cant buy up an entire industry, even in a free capitolist system (airline mergers comes to mind), or the same reason microsoft was forced to allow more 3rd party software in its OS. Now as with ur current position with verizon, you would probably say that u if didnt like it, switch to apple! But then what happens if you dont want apple for aternative reasons. Does that mean you should be forced to deal with microsoft unfairly not allowing you to use a 3rd party browser just because you dislike the alternative (apple) even more?

    This is why we need to support unlocking the stupid GPS uniformally! Because agree with whether verizon can do it or not, you have to at least agree that its a profit hungry tactic to allow us not to use 3rd party software in our phones so that verizon can make money off its own service. Not because its the best, but because we dont have any other choice in the matter.

    and again, 3rd party navigtors ARE NOT FREE! No one is asking for free! The whole reason free comes up is because google and BB maps are free. And if they are free, then thats google's and BB's priority, not verizons!
    Last edited by RicanMedic78; 11-29-08 at 04:36 PM.
    11-29-08 04:05 PM
  7. howie's Avatar
    ...And Themes is part of the Blackberry device whether it be HW, firmware or software. What if the theme on your BB was locked to the Verizon only one and for $10 you could get it unlocked? Same as the GPS we're discussing.

    As for 3rd party applications, I'm not sure how that factors in to this discussion. We're talking about what comes on the base device as documented on the Blackberry site.

    All these aGPS phones receive signals directly from the orbiting satellites. They can be assisted by cell tower info if they are unable to communicate with the sat GPS. And the sat GPS provides MUCH, MUCH, MUCH more accurate data then tower based data.
    Every carrier has themes locked to just that carrier and many themes are sold for a fee (yes, you can "hack" the install files to allow any carriers themes to be installed and there are many that are free also) so I don't see this as a valid argument. The "3rd party apps" as you called them are just as equal as the themes. Verizon pushes those service books to your device right now so they are just as much a part of the device as VZNav is.

    Regarding aGPS, my understanding of the requirement to the "a" part was that the regular GPS signal was not accurate enough for e911, therefore they added the "a" assist from tower coverage to pinpoint more. Yes, the phone can receive some aerospace communication, but because it also depends on the "a", which is Verizon's network, they can control how it can be used.

    You aren't getting the concept here. We're not disputing the fact that VZ is within their right to charge for VZNav. We're disputing the fact that the GPS HW device in our Blackberry's is crippled by VZ so it only works with their application after paying a fee. Uncripple the HW and charge $10/mo for VZ Nav. No one would then care as there are competitive solutions that would be available. But with the GPS crippled by Verizon, there's no competition...
    It's only "crippled" because it depends on the network for accuracy - why would Verizon allow the aGPS to use their network with 3rd party navigation software? But, that's a null point now. It was a fact for phones until present day... apparently the Storm doesn't have this limitation (according to previous post in this thread), so why are people upset?

    The competitiveness issue comes from a device MADE for a specific network (ie: the firmware that RIM and Verizon mutually agreed to use). The equipment depends on that network... it's not free standing.

    ...The GPS is HW and part of the physical device we all purchased. It wasn't free - we bought it...I want the GPS which I already pay for to function as it comes from the HW manufacturer...
    Not everyone paid for it :P But, I do understand about "your property". The problem is that Verizon owns the network and controls what devices can use it (the phone or the GPS). It is coming as the manufacturer made it. Verizon doesn't make the firmware, RIM does. They test it together and agree on what it can/can't do. If RIM didn't like it, they wouldn't sell it. Certainly wouldn't be the first time RIM said no and sold it elsewhere.

    Again, I'm not saying Verizon is right in doing this... but that I don't see this being a lawsuit issue which was the OP'ers stance. I think the best way is to have thousands send in comments to Verizon HQ and boycott the devices/service. When they see people won't "just take it" they WILL change. They did that with the "open access" and bluetooth (albeit there were lawsuits, but they continued to do it after those.)
    Last edited by cliffr39; 11-29-08 at 05:54 PM.
    11-29-08 05:50 PM
  8. BlackBerry Guy's Avatar
    There was a lawsuit a few years ago against Verizon for the crippled bluetooth on the Moto V710. I can't remember exactly what happened in the end, but it didn't force them to uncripple their phones. I would think any lawsuit for crippled GPS would have the same result.
    11-29-08 07:59 PM
  9. quikDC's Avatar
    Class action lawsuits are worthless. The only ones who benefit are the lawyers. The people who join them rarely get anything.
    11-29-08 08:54 PM
  10. leftcoaster's Avatar
    Why does everyone miss the point on this whole thing. In no way does is cost VZW anything to have the GPS unlocked on the phone, so why charge for it other than the fact it is all profit. The comments about things like ' I didn't think I would have to pay for data and voice' and 'the I didn't think I would have to pay for gas to the car' are just pointless. Bottomline the GPS system (which has already been paid for and maintained by tax dollars) is not owner by VZW. The only thing someone needs to use the system is a GPS receiver and the software to understand the signal, and RIM already provided both of those items with the purchase of the phone. So I don't think VZW should allowed to change 9.99 a month for a program, because truely that is what you need up paying for. The government should ask for the profits from VZW afterall they (we the taxpayer) paid for it, or maybe the government should lock it all down again and make us pay for it through them. But that's just my thoughts on the whole thing.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com

    Bingo! Perhaps you can tell that to our third-year law student/Verizon hack.
    11-29-08 09:03 PM
  11. RicanMedic78's Avatar
    PPL who defend verizons actions need to stop because their arguing against their own interest which doesn't make much sense does it now?
    11-29-08 09:06 PM
  12. RicanMedic78's Avatar
    and its just not arguing because its in your interest, its also arguing cuz u know your RIGHT in your argument!
    11-29-08 09:07 PM
  13. leftcoaster's Avatar
    and its just not arguing because its in your interest, its also arguing cuz u know your RIGHT in your argument!

    Just to inject some levity here ... the philosophy behind class-action lawsuits is not to make anyone whole, or rich, but to encourage companies that produce consumer goods to do so more responsibly. Anyone who rejects the idea of such a lawsuit on the grounds that "only the lawyers get rich" is missing the point. If companies are held accountable, they adjust their practices. If the suit has no merit, it will be dismissed. No harm; no foul. It really is as simple as that.
    11-29-08 09:14 PM
  14. RicanMedic78's Avatar
    agreed!

    if there were never any lawsuits, companies would be able to do whatever they want without penalty. The free market doesnt always have the ability to correct itself when greed takes over
    11-29-08 09:21 PM
  15. monkeymisfit's Avatar
    Just a quick question to the people who say switch to a different carrier. What do you tell the people who live in an area with only one carrier still? Do you tell them to use a land line, or just wait for one of the other carriers to move into the area?

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    11-30-08 09:57 AM
  16. RicanMedic78's Avatar
    my point exactly! Sometimes, for whatever reason, you just may not have option... or the option to switch is not beneficial. And companies feed off that problem

    Hense, verizon has a good network and believes people will just deal with it
    11-30-08 10:07 AM
  17. Joker2's Avatar
    Who cares about the opinions of the VZW employees anyway they are SO BIASED on this topic. They could care less about consumer needs or corporate greed.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    I don't think you can say that about all VZW employees. I am tech inside Verizon stores, employed by a seperate company that Verizon pays for us to be there. Regardless I am not biased in any way. I carry 2 active cell phones AT&T as well and Verizon. And I DO agree that Verizon is in the wrong by setting the phone to only be used with TeleNav. However AT&T does the same thing with the Black Jack II, BUT there is a third party app by Modaco which essentially hacks the phone and allows the GPS chip to be used by any mapping application.
    12-01-08 02:59 AM
  18. cp1224's Avatar
    What is wrong with you people who are defending this practice? If a company acts to corner the market on a service, to the exclusion of all other providers of that service, that's actionable in a class action lawsuit. Since Verizon blocks 3rd party GPS, and forces customers to pay for a service which is otherwise free, that's actionable. Period. And, hey, 3rd year law student...I would bet you haven't studied class actions or unfair trade practices, otherwise you would have given a different response.

    And, no, don't consult a "local attorney." Class actions are very specialized in the world of law. You have to talk with an attorney who specializes in class actions.
    12-01-08 03:22 AM
  19. cp1224's Avatar
    Yep...read it, and, since you're not a lawyer, put it down and go see one....after you wake up.
    12-01-08 06:49 AM
  20. GeekNJ's Avatar
    before doing anything, read your contract.
    The contract I have says that the GPS in my device is intentially crippled by Verizon and in order to use the device in the unit I purchased I need to pay them $10/mo for an additional service which still excludes me from using any other 3rd party application which supports the internal GPS?

    Can you point to where in the contract that is please.
    12-01-08 05:10 PM
  21. RicanMedic78's Avatar
    before doing anything, read your contract.
    I guess it would also be legal if I got u to signed a contract that stated in vey small print "I will be applying extreme force into your @$$hole with a blunt object" right?
    Last edited by RicanMedic78; 12-01-08 at 06:33 PM.
    12-01-08 06:31 PM
  22. darkhorserecords's Avatar
    well, I have to say that this post is the most HILARIOUS thing I have ever read. Thank you all for providing 15 minutes of straight entertainment.

    I subscribe to VZNav and gladly so, it is a great app that I use regularly (finding backwoods houses in my county ((paramedic)) ) and finding food places, gas stations, etc, in new places I am passing through.

    Do I wish that the GPS was unlocked so I didnt have to pay for it? Of course, who wouldnt? I mainly wish that it was unlocked so I could use it with ALL apps, not just VZNav, (i.e. berry411, Google) I would still gladly pay the 10 a month, but hey, I like a little freedom.

    With all that said however, class action lawsuits mean nothing to the middle to low class that are in them, they help make the rich stay rich and they usually dont accomplish much.

    Hopefully Verizon will grow a heart and give people what they want and what they paid for, but the truth is, they are a corporation, and they dont see people with hard earned money, they just see the money
    12-01-08 06:32 PM
  23. RicanMedic78's Avatar
    Do I wish that the GPS was unlocked so I didnt have to pay for it?
    your not paying for GPS as you paid for that when you bought ur phone ... your paying for VZ Nav! And nobody in this debate is asking for a free VZ Nav
    Last edited by RicanMedic78; 12-01-08 at 06:41 PM.
    12-01-08 06:36 PM
  24. RicanMedic78's Avatar
    With all that said however, class action lawsuits mean nothing to the middle to low class that are in them, they help make the rich stay rich and they usually dont accomplish much.
    I'd love to see your nation wide statistics on that point
    12-01-08 06:43 PM
  25. supermike437433's Avatar
    Good Job Verizon for taking a step in the right direction regarding your recent decision to enable GPS capabilities.

    However, early indications are that the GPS capabiltiies is only operating when used with BB maps. All other programs that are able to access GPS signals on the 8330 for Sprint, appear to remain blocked by Verizon Wireless.

    To the Verizon employees, who regularly scour this forum site and blast those of us who criticize Verizon for some blantantly unfair and unfriendly tactics, should take this opportunity and reflect on how they could better serve their company's interests.

    Don't be a "Yes Man". Make reccomendations to management based on "common sense" and "just" postings. Report to VZW management at how happy subscribers are that Verizon went this route. Promote a complete unlocking of GPS capabilties for all Verizon Phones. Although, I applaud Verizon Wireless for going in this direction, anything less than a complete unlocking of the GPS capabilities will still warrant a class action lawsuit, that will result in inevitable victory.
    12-04-08 02:36 PM
685 ... 34567 ...
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD