[macFanDave]

>>> and furrow my brown
Oops! It looks like someone is letting the spell-checker be his editor ;) One usually furrows one's BROW, but maybe the excitement of seeing a Triple Crown winner for the first time in 30 years has Big Brown on everyone's mind.
As far as the key factor that will determine when I upgrade my current iPhone to the speculated new one: a camera with flash and zoom.

[Martian]

The predictably bad service from AT&T rekindles the question, why did Apple go with (notorious) AT&T?

Was it so iPhone could cover the whole world with just one technology — GSM — or was it that Verizon — the best choice for the US — wouldn’t sign onto the unprecedented iPhone business model where the handset supplier gets the gravy.

[Steve_S]

Martian said:

The predictably bad service from AT&T rekindles the question, why did Apple go with (notorious) AT&T?

These discussions are rather pointless as they are based on gross over generalizations. Quality of services obviously various from location to location. Some locations will be better served by Verizon, some by AT&T. Over the years, I've had both. I don't have any allegiance to one over the other, but AT&T serves me just as well as Verizon ever did. Further, recent tests indicate AT&T has a significantly better 3G network than Verizon.
http://www.computerw...ticleId=9083559

Quote

Was it so iPhone could cover the whole world with just one technology — GSM — or was it that Verizon — the best choice for the US — wouldn’t sign onto the unprecedented iPhone business model where the handset supplier gets the gravy.

Verizon did apparently turn down the iPhone deal. Their loss. From Apple's perspective, having one GSM based phone that it can sell around the world was obviously a better choice anyway. Verizon is fine, but it's certainly not universally better than AT&T. All carriers have issues. Which carrier is better for you very much depends on where you use your service. The iPhone however, is the one phone I would switch carriers for if I had to.

[MorrisTheCat]

I wonder if it's at all possible that Apple may be able to break it's contract with AT&T when they release the iPhone 2.0. Could they have hidden a clause in the contract that would allow them to point out that they only went into a 5 yr agreement under the first iPhone? That iPhone 2 does not apply to the original agreement?
I kind of hope so, although I'm not holding m breath for that. It would be really nice for Apple to break out of this single carrier mode they're in in the U.S.
Though something tells me Verizon would still be stupid enough to not want to carry it on Apple's terms.

[urapns2]

2 of the 3 numbers on my plan have just gone end of contract and the third will do so in a couple of months. The only thing holding me back on iPhones is the thought of going to ATT. While they may be better than Sprint/Nextel that's like being given a choice of ingesting cyanide or rat poison. Neither is going to be fun.

We'll see if the iPhone benefits out weigh the ATT negatives. FWIW, from what I've seen of Visual Voice Mail on friends iPhones isn't that big of deal. And that was one of the features that got me on board...

[bvid]

Just to add that even though Apple has an exclusive partner in Ireland, o2, visual voicemail is currently not supported. Also there is only 1GB of Data per month and they charge higher prices than they do in England or the US. With this in mind I don't see that Visual Voicemail will be implemented in places like Italy. If they can't do it with exclusive providers how are they going to do it non-exclusively?

[warlock7]

I don't know of anybody that ever suggested that Apple would remain exclusive to a carrier.

That being said: unlockers still don't appear prescient in any way.

[warlock7]

I've got to agree with Adobephile. AT&T's service is fine, always has been.

[Grapho]

Visual voice mail is not all that is cracked up to be. I have gotten messages literally hours after being recorded. It is not often, but it has happened.

[Edgejr]

Grapho said:

Visual voice mail is not all that is cracked up to be. I have gotten messages literally hours after being recorded. It is not often, but it has happened.

Well, for that matter, audio voice mail is not better. Got messages on Sprint days after they were in the mailbox. Had to turn off the transmitter and log back into their network before it alerted my phone that it had messages. It's not the "visual" part of the voice mail that's defective, it's the message servers the phone companies are using that's the problem, visual or otherwise.

All this back and forth about good versus bad is a bit pointless. They're all big companies and their service (customer or reception) is, at times, spotty.

I hate all phone companies. That way I don't discriminate. ;-)

[jbm193]

The basic rundown is this.
Sprint/Nextel: Horribly unorganized after the merger, different cellular systems that don't like each other very much and marveled as the worst customer service for cellular carriers in the US. (I should know, I had them before and after the merger.)
T-Mobile: In the US they are just to small a company and their coverage is almost bordering on funny. (I stood in a T-Mobile office outside Washington DC and their phone read NO SERVICE in their own offices.) They are improving but through the use of other company towers.
Verizon: As mentioned before their system is not really universal and would require multiple designs of the iphone. Their coverage is good and well liked by most people that have, but they are also one of the most expensive carriers in the US and have been around long enough to know not to let a cellphone manufacturer get the better of you.
AT&T: Recently out of a merger or takeover looking to boost their image and grab up as many customers as possible were most likely the easiest to deal with that also offered the advantage of the GSM system. As well AT&T were intelligent enough to say OK to fair data and plan fees knowing full well that 2 year contracts would easily reap them large financial rewards without the iphone's dollars dropping in their pockets. (I have spoken to AT&T and Cingular management folks over the years and they know full well its not the phone that makes them the money its how much you us it.)

[Martian]

A bit of irony.

Cell service is so much better outside of North America because in many other countries, new cellular systems provided an end run around the lousy, very over priced, often government post office operated landline infrastructure and service. Meanwhile, North Americans didn’t “need” anything more than pagers to augment their excellent landline and payphone infrastructure.

Even more ironic, it was pre-breakup AT&T that was the single largest driving force behind North America’s excellent landline service.