Why does Verizon seem to get all the good phones first?
Does anybody in this forum know why it seems Verizon has been getting the latest and greatest phones first? For example they got the Treo 700 first and supposedly the PPC 6800. Also they got the first 3.2 megapixel camera phone for the US market. Is it because they are one of the biggest carriers or do they simply offer better deals to the manufacturers? For example Sprint does have a great data network that in many respects out preforms Verizon and has a lower cost. Yet Verizon grabs all the latest phones that benefit from a strong data network first. Whats the deal? By the way this is not intended to start any carrier bashing, please only respond if you have any information on the subject. Thanks
...
It's shocking to hear that from someone on here. Usually it's the other way around. People always complaining that Verizon has no good phones!
...
vzwinagent said:
It's shocking to hear that from someone on here. Usually it's the other way around. People always complaining that Verizon has no good phones!
It's usually the GSM carriers that get the best phones first, then a CDMA version might get a similar phone later on. I wonder if the original poster is with Alltel or USCC. When it comes to CDMA phones, Verizon is usually first to get the best phones, before Alltel or USCC.
...
That's not true. Maybe international GSM phones like Vodafone or Japanese phones. In the us Verizon does get the first phones as mentioned before treo, ppc, krzr, q Gsm gets an updated version of the CDMA phone hence treo 680 and 750 of the treo 700. Verizon is the biggest CDMA provider in the US so naturally manufacturers want to supply their phones to a larger audience, ergo sprint receives them second, then alltell e.g. motorola q and krzr. But the tables are turning sprint is getting more exclusive and temp exclusive contracts e.g. Samsung upstage, treo 755p. Some years the tables turn this year its more sprint.
...
Example, USCC had the krzr before Verizon and Alltel, both of which have bigger custie numbers than us.
...
LordObento said:
I agree, was he being sarcastic? Verizon, good phones, first???
Have they solved their Bluetooth interoperability problem yet?
...
It's not a problem for Verizon. They programmed (or tried to ) the BT's with the "problem" on purpose.
...
Yep; except for the Q, the 700p, and, to a lesser degree: the KRZR & the SLVR.
...
Verizon might be good. but its waaaaay @ pricey and there's no unlimited texts and the data plan is double the price than sprint and doesnt even do half. and there's no mobile tv.
...
I'm speaking as a person that's used Spring recently and a current Verizon user of almost a year : Sprint's network isn't nearly as strong, their operating system (depending on which phone it is {the v3m RAZR, KRZR & SLVR, for sure}) is more neutered than Verizon's, their MMS structure sucks as well (as you actually have to go on line to retrieve messages), ringers, caller tunes (or whatever they call them) only last for 90 days, they customer service isn't too friendly, and Verizon DOES have Mobile TV (in certain areas). Is Sprint cheaper? Yes; but you get what you pay for.
...
that's not really true. verizon got the 700w first which sucked(i had one) and the 6800 is basically a cdma version of the 8525 for cingular. Verizon's phones usually aren't that great. I have the EnV but I am over the fact that it is purely a texters phone.
...
And a camera phone. The only 2 things that I hate about it is:
1. I can't send any pictures, videos, or music via bluetooth.
2. No pictures that are 1600x1280 resolution or videos that are 320x240 resolution can be sent.
Other than that, the EnV kicks ass!
1. I can't send any pictures, videos, or music via bluetooth.
2. No pictures that are 1600x1280 resolution or videos that are 320x240 resolution can be sent.
Other than that, the EnV kicks ass!
...
