AT&T adds Verizon's Island of Misfit Toys holiday ads to lawsuit, demands they be yanked off the air
By Nilay Patel 
posted Nov 12th 2009 2:03PM
posted Nov 12th 2009 2:03PM
Happy holidays, folks.The spotted elephant, in a surprised manner, asks the iPhone "What are you doing here? You can download apps and browse the web!" and a Dolly for Sue asserts that "Yeah. People will love you [the iPhone]."
Why do I get the assumption that At&t's lawyers are small children?
Oh AT&T....
AT&T, Now with more T!
(tears)
This has just become sad. AT&T seems to be a big baby whining because someone picked onthem at the school yard
How the hell does the iPhone belong on the iSland of misfit toys when it outsells everything single other phone in every single country?
I don't care if I get downranked cause Verizon SUCKS. And once they finally do get iPhone they'll finally see real profit and market growth.
@Whitecollarcriminal
"when it outsells everything single other phone in every single country"
Hahahahahaha, right...
LMAO @whitecollarcriminal
Obviously you haven't heard of Blackberry Curve have you?
or perhaps, Nokia?
"How the hell does the iPhone belong on the iSland of misfit toys when it outsells everything single other phone in every single country?"
You missed the point of the article by a whole country mile. Here's some bus fare for the ride home.
AT&T's lawyers probably love stuff like this, puts food on the table.
And I guess it's cheaper for AT&T to keep paying the lawyers than it is for them to build some more 3G towers...sigh.
OH...N900 and your witty comebacks. I love it!
@ N900
Really LOL at that one....forget the bus fare make him jog it home....
I live in Ireland, where AT&T do not exist...where kids do not sue eachother...where AT&T do not exist...where people love not having dropped calls in their iphone...where AT&T do not exist...where we get awesome network and 3g coverage everywhere...It's a good life :D (did i mention no AT&T?)
lol. AT&T's butthurt.
AT&T is NOT A BABBBAAAAAAY!!!
This would work IF the iPhone was on Verizon, but for the casual consumer (you know, the one that asks for the iPhone by name and won't take anything else) another phone on any network just isn't what they are looking for. The iPhone spreads so much by word of mouth. If people really had horrible coverage like these ads claimed, they wouldn't be selling like hotcakes.
Notice how AT&T lawyers conveniently left out the corroborating statements of the 'Charlie in the Box'. And did they even bother to take a deposition from the train with square wheels? And it appears a squirt gun that shoots grape jelly has skipped town in order to avoid a subpoena.
thats not even a iPhone, it could be any phone, it just resembles the iPhone (of course i know it was meant to play the role as iPhone)
Verizon Spot
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4JgrBtn8XdU
Original
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5SH1j1luFOw
"You missed the point of the article by a whole country mile. Here's some bus fare for the ride home."
No I would say he missed the point by at least 1 AU. Minimum.
@ trainwrecka: They tried, trust me, but everytime they wanted to tell somebody about their bad reception problems their call would drop.
These ad's are a nightmare for AT&T. It's time to get the wallet out for some serious network investing before all your customers bail.
Stop crying, you f**king pansies. Microsoft never did a cease and desist on your borderline slanderous ads so don't be so bloody hypocritical.
Huh? This is between AT&T and Verizon. WTF are you talking about? Troll.
Uhm... I think you're thinking about Apple bitching re: the Laptop Hunters ads, which isn't really related to AT&T v. Verizon.
At this point, it has already been proven that 3G coverage and Voice coverage are not the same thing. The map has proven to be accurate and fair; why does AT&T assume so blindly that they have the upper hand?
Game. Set. Match. With a perfect response. 10/10. Excellent. Superb. Best lollar of the day.
I want some beer : (
Att's combined 3G and 2.5G (edge) coverage map...
http://www.wireless.att.com/coverageviewer/images/coverage_Data.gif
People tend to forget that EVDO Rev A is not much faster than EDGE in typical use (low end). And that Att's 3G is far faster than EVDO Rev A. Assuming theoretical maximum speed EVDO trounces EDGE, but in real world speed tests EVDO is not that much faster on the low end.Certainly EVDO is a lot faster on the high end, but Verizon's map does not differentiate between different levels of EVDO. In fact, in some areas on Verizon's map EVDO coverage is equal to EDGE in real world speed. Also, Verizon
I know the following graph comes from a questionable/bias source but I can't dispute the facts presented. Maybe someone else can?
http://images.appleinsider.com/att.verizon.3g.speed.png
Now if Verizon was advertising Att's truly horrid service in New York and other parts of the country with regard to dropped calls, then I think Att would have no case. Hell, they might have no case as it stands now...time will tell.
Disclaimer: I use Tmobile $40/month unlimited voice ftw!!
Okay... I'd just give you some Microsoft news then.
They blocked a million XBox live subscriptions today and then told them to buy new XBox consoles.
You can expect PS3 sales up by a million tomorrow.
Also, here is a more detailed Verizon map
http://phones.verizonwireless.com/3g/imgs/verizonmap.jpg
^^ That map is important because it shows more holes in Verizon's network than the TV add, where the low resolution shows more solid red areas than are actually there.
Sourced from Verizon's website...
@RitzXDeF
that's because they modded their XBOX. They're not running around banning people to get them to buy a new XBOX. They broke the agreement they made with them. How is Microsoft being unfair?
and sorry, those guys aren't going to run out and buy a PS3 and replace all their games and accessories they already own. It's not like buying a DVD player.
your news is lame.
@John Galt
I seriously don't know why everyone is jumping on the AT&T hate wagon. I bet most you never used Verizon before. Sure, they have good coverage, but the *actual speed* is average to slow. Verizon is being sly and counting its ancient 1xRTT services (similar to GPRS on AT&T, the thing before EDGE) as "3G", because it technically is a 3rd generation of CDMA even though it maxes out around 150kbps.
The same thing applies with Verizon's EV-DO Rev.0 service. It's considered "3G" although it's only around the same speed as EDGE.
Still, I find Verizon's service to be pretty decent overall, especially when traveling to "the middle of nowhere". However, although there may be coverage there, speeds are so horrible the only thing you can really do is send SMS and make calls even though you are still in a "3G" area.
@ThreeDee912
Where are you getting that EDGE is the same speed as EVDO Rev 0?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_device_bandwidths
EDGE Evolution isn't the same as EDGE and I've never heard of AT&T deploying anything but plain vanilla EDGE, which caps at 250kbps real world. Even AT&T only claims to get about those speeds: http://developer.att.com/developer/index.jsp?page=toolsTechDetail&id=7600078
EVDO Rev 0 I believe is in the range of 600-1000kbps. A 4x difference is pretty substantial.
@ThreeDee912:
>Verizon is being sly and counting its ancient 1xRTT services
>(similar to GPRS on AT&T, the thing before EDGE) as "3G"
No, they aren't. Not in this map, at least:
http://vzwmap.verizonwireless.com/dotcom/coveragelocator/images/maps/3Gcomparison.pdf
If you look at their coverage locator (*), and choose "Enhanced Services" (i.e., 1xRTT or EV-DO), you'll see plenty of places where they do have 1xRTT, but don't have 3G. So, no, they're not being sly.
(*) http://www.verizonwireless.com/b2c/CoverageLocatorController?requesttype=NEWREQUEST&lid=//global//plans//coverage+maps),
The Verizon map clearly says, "3G Broadband Coverage (EV-DO)".
>The same thing applies with Verizon's EV-DO Rev.0 service.
According to Wikipedia, Verizon doesn't have any EV-DO Rev.0 towers left; they've upgraded them all to Rev.A.
Of course, even Rev.A. is slower than AT&T's HSPA network. Rev.A maxes out at 3Mb/s; AT&T's HSPA is at 3.6, and starting to light up at 7.2--and can go up to 56Mb/s. (Plus, HSPA--even UMTS--can do simultaneous voice and data.) No wonder Verizon is scrambling to go to LTE.
AT&T: Bah Humbug!
Happy Lolidays
Even the most hardened iPhone fanboi must admit that these ads are pretty funny. AT&T is just having a sense of humor failure.
I guess they don't have an app for that.
Of course not have you seen that approval process..
I have iPhone and AT&T and I love those adds, come one AT&T service SUCKS.
I use to have Verizon, and I though that AT&T will be able to improve their service when they move to 3G, problem is I can't get any 3G, and lately it has been getting worse in Los Angeles area.
Why frustrates me the most is that LA is 2nd largest city in US and I have a shitty service.
I am gonna wait a while and if DROID get's enough apps I just might, I just might SWITCH.
AT&T stop spending money on lawsuits, which are frivolous in the first place and start improving your 3G coverage.
Bunch of little pansies.
iPhoneHumor app was rejected becuase it contained the word "humor."
iPhones is serious business!
I love it. Take your lump of coal in your stocking this xmas. AQQ, I mean ATT. Idea for next Verizon commercial BTW
Truth hurts, bitches! Bend over and take it!
I can go just 2 miles outside of my city and I'm on an EDGE connection. When I was on vacation last summer, it was a total pain in the ass to have to wait for Google Maps to load because there was no 3G coverage within a hundred miles. AT&T seriously sucks matinee balls
I honestly had no idea that Verizon's coverage was THAT good until I saw these ads, and now I'm starting the process of switching. Maybe Ma Bell needs to work on their 3G network coverage than going ape over these ads.
Or spend some money on infrastructure improvements.
Skip 3G altogether and start rolling out LTE, that's their only chance with smartphone users IMO. Once Verizon starts focusing their efforts on building out LTE/4G it is going to happen pretty quick. They plan on starting to deploy in 2010 and complete rollout by 2013 which is pretty impressive.
ATT isn't planning on starting the rollout until 2011 and if 3G is any indication, they may never extend it to their entire network. There may be areas that never even get 3G.
I honestly can't imagine Apple not releasing a phone with a hybrid GSM/CDMA/LTE radio at some point and putting it on Verizon. As feature laden as it is, real coverage would be a welcome change.
2 miles...shoot. I can literally be within my city...and it drops to EDGE. That was sucky service.
@Look
A little over a year ago, I was shocked to wake up and see the [EV] indicator on my phone. I live in a small town of 10k people, an hour away from the closest thing to a city. I've noticed more and more towers in my rural area getting 3G, and now I am hard pressed to go anywhere I don't have it...it's great.
My guess is they have been planning this a while...since the iPhone started kicking their ass a bit, maybe? Anyway, I'll take it. Over the last year, Verizon has sucked significantly less all around, not just in coverage. They are still pricey, but at least they justify it somewhat now.
Truth is, Verizon’s EVDO is not as fast as AT&T’s 3G (HSDPA/UMTS). GSM 3G (on at&t) allows for simultaneous data & voice while Verizon's CDMA 3G does not. Same with the Pre on Sprint: it has no data and voice simultaneously. That factors highly in the arguement of which service is more useful to me.
And how good is Verizon's iPhone coverage? Trick question; there is none. So if the holiday consumer that sees this ad still wants an iPhone, it won't matter anyway.
Better and/or Faster 3G doesn't really help me if I can't get it in most areas.
Don't get me wrong, if you live in an area with great ATT coverage and you never travel, its just fine and those improvements can make the difference when choosing carriers, but I would much rather have slightly slower connection speed with no capability for voice and data practically everywhere, than slightly faster voice and data at the same time in a very small area.
Nice!!! I like it when companies fight dirty in public!
It clearly says "3G coverage". Which is what one needs if they want to properly use the internet on the go. I think someone is afraid of the droid.
That right there is why AT&T is suing Verizon. Verizon is trying really hard to make it look like you can't get internet in those white spaces on the AT&T map. But since that's completely false, it should be obvious why AT&T is suing them.
You're right, you'll have coverage in those white areas...coverage so slow that no sane person would bother streaming video or any other bandwidth-intensive action in those areas (i.e. "properly use the internet on the go"). However, the map in the commercial clearly says 3G coverage and in those white areas, there is none. You're not using your all of your fancy new iphone's features if you're living in one of those white areas. I don't see the problem with these ads other than AT&T trying to sweep attention to their spotty data service under the rug.
No, that's an incorrect implication. Wherever there isn't 3G, there is EDGE. Verizon is "trying really hard" to tell you in those naked areas, you don't get the fastest data: 3G coverage. That's why they put "3G coverage" on the map. You can't honestly tell me that people also don't know the difference between EDGE and 3G. Seeing as there are visual implementations/icons on your phone to let you know whether you have EDGE or 3G.
Verizon could easily have had a dual colored map, one color for EDGE and one for 3G. But then it would have looked like AT&T had more coverage, wouldn't it? If you really think Verizon didn't make those areas white on purpose, specifically to try to make people think AT&T has no coverage in those areas, you are frighteningly naive.
And of course people don't know the difference between EDGE and 3G. We're not talking about tech savvy people here, we are talking about the lowest common denominator. The general public. That's the point. Most people are going to see "3G coverage only" and not have any idea what that means. What they will notice is that the AT&T map looks like it barely has any coverage at all. That's specifically why Verizon did it as a map, because it's visual. Do you know anything about how marketing and advertising works?
Everything they did in those ads was intentional. That's why AT&T is suing them.
Jack, white is a color too, white represents EDGE.
Yeah intentional at showing AT&T's crappy 3G coverage. Your assumption of the average consumer being an idiot (while that might be true) has no bearing on the facts.
"Verizon could easily have had a dual colored map, one color for EDGE and one for 3G. But then it would have looked like AT&T had more coverage, wouldn't it? If you really think Verizon didn't make those areas white on purpose, specifically to try to make people think AT&T has no coverage in those areas, you are frighteningly naive."
Uhh... welcome to marketing, where the whole point is to take advantage of peoples ignorance and to make your product/service look superior while still remaining honest. Which is exactly what Verizon is doing. It's not their fault if people don't do go google the difference between edge and 3G before they buy a new phone if they're looking to take advantage of web browsing.
@Jack:
I really don't think this lawsuit has much merit to it. Verizon isn't required to explain to consumers what the difference between 3G and 2G data coverage is. You're right, the common person may not understand it, but it isn't misleading at all. It clearly says "3G Coverage" under the image. your argument would be like making Comcast explain why their broadband internet is different/faster than dial-up service.
There isn't anything misleading here. Sure ignorant customers can interpret it however they want--just like ignorant people interpret every day normal things however they want.
I mean at the end of the day, how much hand-holding are we required to do?
When people pay for a smart phone and data plan, I would wager they're expecting to be able to stream videos, download content, etc. Can you do this without 3G coverage? Probably. Would you wait all that time while it downloaded? I know I wouldn't and I'd be pissed that they sold me a phone based on those features and I can't reliably use them. Of course they did it as a map! How would you show data coverage in the US without using a map? So you're argument is that it's wrong for them to intentionally point out dead spots in their 3G coverage?
What he is implying, so incorrectly, is that the general public is so stupid, that they can't discern the simple difference between EDGE and 3G. I have already told you that there are visual icons on your iPhone to let you know whether you have 3G or EDGE. Verizon's intentions are practically invalidated by that fact alone. Do I have to show you pictures to actually prove this?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:IPhonehomescreen.PNG
http://www.theiphoneblog.com/images/stories/2008/09/iphone_21_3g_edge_icons.jpg
http://www.theiphoneblog.com/images/stories/2008/09/iphone_21_sms_load_older.jpg
Marketing, knowledge of marketing, and blind perceptions of what the public may or may not know, are INVALIDATED. Quit being a smart ass and realize this.
White represents EDGE? You mean AT&T actually has 100% coverage over the entire US between 3G and EDGE? Interesting take on it.
ljm: "Yeah intentional at showing AT&T's crappy 3G coverage. Your assumption of the average consumer being an idiot (while that might be true) has no bearing on the facts"
How does it have no bearing on the facts? Verizon is intentionally using that to make it appear as though AT&T has very little coverage over the US. Not 3G coverage specifically - ANY coverage. They are DEPENDING on people not knowing the difference. That was the entire point of this campaign.
salmoncannon: "Uhh... welcome to marketing, where the whole point is to take advantage of peoples ignorance and to make your product/service look superior while still remaining honest."
Yes, that's exactly what I said. Did you not read my last post? Verizon is intentionally taking advantage of the fact that most people don't know what 3G is and don't know the difference between 3G and anything else. You seem to be at odds with some of the other commenters here who are trying to say that the general public DOES know the difference. Maybe you guys should just fight it out and let me know what you all end up agreeing on.
rickjames: "Verizon isn't required to explain to consumers what the difference between 3G and 2G data coverage is. You're right, the common person may not understand it, but it isn't misleading at all. It clearly says "3G Coverage" under the image."
Sigh. "The common person may not understand it" and "isn't misleading" contradict each other. Verizon is COUNTING on most people not knowing the difference, and not caring or knowing what 3G is. All they see is the AT&T map with not very much coverage. Those people will then think that AT&T has NO coverage in those areas, which is MISLEADING.
AT&T's point here is that Verizon is being misleading on purpose. And they're right, they are. Just ask salmoncannon up there.
daaper: "So you're argument is that it's wrong for them to intentionally point out dead spots in their 3G coverage?"
Jesus christ. Really? You really don't understand what I've been saying? No, it's wrong for Verizon to make it look like AT&T has ZERO COVERAGE in those areas. The fact that they're doing it on purpose is why AT&T is suing them. As I've said over and over and over, the average person doesn't care about 3G, doesn't know what it is, won't bother to read the little words on the screen that say "3G". They will just look at the map and see that there isn't a whole lot of coverage on the AT&T map.
That will make people think AT&T has no coverage in those white areas, because contrary to what some of you apparently believe, nobody studies commercials for factual accuracy. They see a map with not a lot of coverage on it, and assume that the empty parts mean "no coverage". Not "no 3G coverage", NO COVERAGE.
N900: " is that the general public is so stupid, that they can't discern the simple difference between EDGE and 3G."
Which is true. Most of them don't know what either technology is, or how it relates to their daily lives. Furthermore, please note that in Verizon's ads, there is no mention of EDGE coverage at all. Isn't that kind of the point? Also, why are you bothering to refer to screenshots of the iPhone? We're talking about Verizon's ads here. Last I heard, you don't need an iPhone to watch them.
And since marketing is the entire point of this conversation, I fail to see how it's invalidated. Verizon is specifically and intentionally using the general public's ignorance to make people think AT&T has very little coverage in the US. That will get people to buy Droids simply because people will think that in over 75% of the US they won't even be able to make CALLS if they're on AT&T.
You really can't see why AT&T might have a problem with that? Really?
i don't know that that 'what one must have part' but yes the map clearly says 3g coverage. and so long as the two maps are accurate on that point, then technically there is no false advertising.
and yet I get what ATT is saying about the fluid definitions of the terms etc.
but suing just makes them look like whiney kids. and dump ones at that.
what they need is to fight fire with fire. most of the world has no clue that there's no standard for 3g in terms of speed. or that ATT and Verizon use two totally different styles of tech. so teach them.
"They say that they have more 3g coverage than the competitors, but what does that really mean. Those guys 3g service typically only gets a speed of X, which is Y% of our 3g service. and what's more it is only Z% higher than our Edge service. So their 3g is really more like our Edge. Put both our services on a map against their 3g and the difference isn't so great (showing the maps of course)"
@ Jack.
The only 2 colours you need to really worry about is the blue 3g coverage on AT&T's 3g map and that downrank grey you seem to have acquired.
It suits you!
@Jack:
The problem with your (and AT&T's) argument is that you're saying AT&T customers are not aware of the difference between EDGE and 3G, and therefore they're being misled by these Verizon ads. I don't see how you/AT&T will win that argument when AT&T themselves have spent so much time/money educating those same consumers that there is a difference between the two, and referring to "3G" specifically in their own advertising.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fnJL5YbMs7U&feature=PlayList&p=BDC817C781E5C229&playnext=1&playnext_from=PL&index=16
AT&T can't claim their consumers are ignorant to this difference when they've educated them about that exact issue. Verizon has every right to assume these users are knowledgable, then show a map comparing the two services. They never say that there is "no service" in the white areas, just that it's not 3G.
@ Jack
Yes I can see how ATTmight have a problem with the way Verizon made the ad. The POINT of the debate(not the point on your head) is this:
ATT can be as pissed as they want, and yes some people out there might be ignorant about the difference, but they have no legal legs to really stand on here. The ad CLEARLY states on the bottom of the map 3G Coverage, it does NOT say it's ATT's total coverage.
They need to stop being panty wastes and go spend some loot on actually making Verizon's life difficult with a good system.
5 year T-Mo customer who switched because I was sick of having to correct ATT's bills for them over the phone because of bullshit charges that didn't exist. No problems with T-Mo in those 5 yrs other than maybe would like a lil more high speed coverage in Louisiana.
The filing reads like a bed time story. Hope they pass out warm milk and blankets in court.
Only thing funnier that the Verizon ads is this lawsuit.
Everyone but AT&T enjoys the ads because everyone knows AT&T has horrible coverage for the majority of consumers. Even Apple is chuckling.
If that's true, I'm not sure I appreciate Apple's attitude.
Actually I know it keeps Jobs up at night while he wears his turtleneck PJs holding an Apple Newton in one hand and a Magic Mouse in the other with an Apple 3 as a night light sitting in the corner.
"Even Apple is chuckling."
Until they start losing sales. In the end it's all about the benjis.
Hilarious. So who's the goat among the two?
That description of the ad in legal language is the greatest thing ever.
hahaha i love the commercials, and i love even more that AT&T is really making the commercials more meaningful by whining about them. The best press coverage is free coverage, and AT&T is giving a boat load to Verizon!
I'm sorry but that is excellent advertising?
Is it illegal to show facts?
Apparently in AT&T's book...it's illegal to use their own 3G maps and speak facts. Because that is in turn misleading information, lol.
Sore losers
I can't feel that sorry for AT&T while they were getting record profits for the iPhones success they neglected to invest in their network. It's no ones fault but their own....
They should have had the abominable snowman come out from behind the mountain and take a big shat on the AT&T logo.
I hope they get a judge with an iPhone. That case will be thrown out in an hour.
Hmmm..... I commercial that "misleads customers". Kinda like that AT&T commercial "more bard in more places".
You show me a commercial that isn't misleading and I show you a company that isn't trying hard enough. Deal with it AT$T. Or better yet, fix your service.
"In medieval Gaelic and British culture (Ireland, Scotland, Wales, Isle of Man and Cornwall) a bard was a professional poet, paid by a monarch to praise the sovereign's activities."
NEEDS MOAR BARD!
LOL, AT$T - The M$ of the 21st Century :)
Nah, in this case Verizon is MS and ATT is Apple. Verizon gives you more for your money but when they point it out in an ad (a-la Microsoft's Laptop Hunters) the competition throws a tantrum.
Apple picked a perfect partner in ATT...you pay out the ass to do what everyone else does better and for less money.
@ neodorian. He was referring to the $ replacing the & in AT$T like the $ replacing the S in M$.
But your point was very valid. Perfect partnership.
Best Reply I've ever seen on this site.
We've had this dance for decades... Commercials ARE Misleading, that is the nature of the beast. Remember the huge Final Fantasy 7 advertising campaign that showed NO gameplay? Does the average meal from a fast food joint look NEARLY as good as they do in the commercials? Has any ad for hardcore booze shown a person, passed out, vomiting, or having a hangover from over drinking?
Is the commercial Misleading? yes. False? No. That is the map of AT&Ts 3G Coverage, And it CLEARLY says 3G. It's no better than when AT&T was doing their ads about international calling and didn't point out the astronomical fees you get if you forget to tell them before you go overseas. It's no different to the fact that almost any commercial for food is using plastic, to show a PERFECT McDonalds burger. Or, I'll just say Axe, and all those other body wash commercials.
Oh and everyone bring up the iPhone... That's not the iPhone on the Island of misfit toys. You were misled!
Best Reply I've ever seen on this site.
We've had this dance for decades... Commercials ARE Misleading, that is the nature of the beast. Remember the huge Final Fantasy 7 advertising campaign that showed NO gameplay? Does the average meal from a fast food joint look NEARLY as good as they do in the commercials? Has any ad for hardcore booze shown a person, passed out, vomiting, or having a hangover from over drinking?
Is the commercial Misleading? yes. False? No. That is the map of AT&Ts 3G Coverage, And it CLEARLY says 3G. It's no better than when AT&T was doing their ads about international calling and didn't point out the astronomical fees you get if you forget to tell them before you go overseas. It's no different to the fact that almost any commercial for food is using plastic, to show a PERFECT McDonalds burger. Or, I'll just say Axe, and all those other body wash commercials.
Oh and everyone bring up the iPhone... That's not the iPhone on the Island of misfit toys. You were misled!
AT&T needs to pull the stick out of their ass, take a real big wiff and realize their shit does stink. I'm also tired of AT&T assuming I can't read.
i r two liturit!
They're clearly only attacking AT&T and in fact complimenting the iphone. Get your head out of your ass and learn the difference. There's no false advertising here, unless someone actually believes there is an island of misfit toys out there.
What I love about this is that AT&T started its campaign of "fastest 3G network" - yet no one can dispute this because no one is on long enough to test it.
Verizon attacks squarely at AT&T's biggest weakspot, of course its insulting. That's the whole point.
word does believe, he lives there
You know you are the iPhone town idiot on these comments ...don't you?
"Once again here we have verizon making disparaging remarks n false advertising."
You mean like how Apple claimed the iPhone was the only device that could use Shazaam, an app that was freely available in the android marketplace?
I can't believe he even managed to spell "disparaging" correctly.
@N900
I can't believe there are AT&T fanboys.
Trolling has stooped to a new level.
@Smartmouth:
Hilarious! But I imagine things will sink to a new low when the TimeWarner and Comcast fanbois start coming out of the woodshed...
@ rickjames04
When that happens, it will take place on Dec 20, 2012...
Somebody call the whaaaaambula -click-
I'm sorry, your call has been disconnected. Please try again later.