the hitchcockhill show: my useless iPhone
Uploader Comments (hitchcockhill)
Top Comments
-
I'm sure someone has mentioned this, but AT&T wasn't Apple's first choice. They initially offered the contact to Verizon, but reneged when Verizon demanded certain rights to control the software output. Lose/lose.
-
for the record, SMS traffic and data traffic are not the same thing and they travel over different networks.
All Comments (14)
-
More bars in more places, that's AT&T. lol.
-
great...cant wait 4 more installments
-
Which will NEVER happen, as indicated by Apple's absurd response when probed about their ban of a Google Voice app.
-
The service is really so bad, I wonder if it's legal. Breach of contract? Fraud? Where are the NY and CA attorney generals' offices on this?
-
I like your show. Thanks!
BTW, I had AT&T Wireless service like 10 yrs ago, it was the scariest and worst experience, so i left and joined T-mobile (and luv it).
A point to Apple I should make in the future is the cost difference between an ipod touch and the iphone when they are practically the same thing. Does the camera and the phone component really raise the price another $300-$400 dollars?
hitchcockhill 2 years ago
The iPhone's actual cost is subsidized by the carrier to entice customers to sign a service contract. (When the iPhone debuted, it was not subsidized, and the purchase price was much, much higher.)
I'm hoping that the iPod touch will eventually get WiMax/LTE capability and a push-enabled "phone" client, and will be able to be used as a full iPhone replacement. The current wireless carriers can then be eliminated from the equation entirely.
zanseattle 2 years ago
Oh - I know it wasn't subsidized since I paid full price. I know profit plays a part but why such a huge difference in price between two items that are nearly identical in function and design, plus/minus a few parts.
hitchcockhill 2 years ago