Phone Scoop

printed August 30, 2015
See this page online at:
http://www.phonescoop.com/phones/p_forum.php?fm=m&ff=475&fh=116832

Home  ›  Phones  ›  Motorola  ›

Motorola V710

 

Info Photos Reviews  100+ News Forum  

all discussions

WE ALL NEED TO COMPLAIN: HERES HOW

WylieECoyote

Oct 25, 2004, 8:11 PM
There are 2 agencies that regulate Verizon:

1) Federal Trade Commision which handles complaints about fraud, false advertising and deceptive business practices, amoung other things. You can file a complaint on their web site www.ftc.gov WE ALL NEED TO FILE COMPLAINTS. They work on a NUMBERS basis. The more complaints, the more chance of them doing something. SPREAD THE WORD.. go everywhere you can and encourage complaints. THIS WILL REALLY TURN UP THE HEAT!!

2) Federal Communications Commission which regulate the airways. They regulate Verizon and have the potential to go after verizon too. www.fcc.gov

THIS IS AN ELECTION YEAR and they tend to be more responsive now.

3) CLASS ACTION lawsuits get attention. It does not matter wh...
(continues)
...
nathanjax

Oct 25, 2004, 8:16 PM
WylieECoyote said:
3) CLASS ACTION lawsuits get attention. It does not matter what the contract we signed says. THEY CANNOT ENFORCE THE CONTRACT IF FRAUD IS INVOLVED. They have definately defrauded us!!
Can I get an AMEN!


I work in cust serv, i will be letting these agencies know of my concerns, but no one was defrauded..

not going to argue, just my 2 cents

Nathan
...
verizonccemp

Oct 25, 2004, 8:55 PM
Don't you feel a little ridiculous?? Honestly, how were you defrauded? You're nothing more than a spoiled child who wants his way and is lying on the ground, kicking his feet for attention. "It does not matter what the contract says"??? What FRAUD have you been inflicted with. Show me one place where WE (not Motorola) stated other than what this phone was capable of. Get a clue. Get a life. Get real and stop wasting everyone's time. If you don't like the phone, you have the same option to return it as everyone else. Try taking some responsibiity for what YOU signed.

(spoken on behalf of my own opinion and not VZW)
...
nathanjax

Oct 25, 2004, 9:20 PM
verizonccemp said:
Don't you feel a little ridiculous?? Honestly, how were you defrauded? You're nothing more than a spoiled child who wants his way and is lying on the ground, kicking his feet for attention. "It does not matter what the contract says"??? What FRAUD have you been inflicted with. Show me one place where WE (not Motorola) stated other than what this phone was capable of. Get a clue. Get a life. Get real and stop wasting everyone's time. If you don't like the phone, you have the same option to return it as everyone else. Try taking some responsibiity for what YOU signed.

(spoken on behalf of my own opinion and not VZW)



Lol.. kinda funny, mostly true (not sure if he's actuly lying...
(continues)
...
ceo2010

Oct 26, 2004, 7:32 AM
Personally, 2 biggest complaints is that this bluetooth issue was advertised, and they did not make it clear that it would not sync contacts.

Second the camera is HORRIBLE. I have the vx 6000 which take pictures 100x better. Not sure if megapixels is an issue with this regard, but in the end, class action or not, VZW will get hurt for selling such a ****ty product.

Once the other carriers catch up as far a call quality goes, VZW will then have to change its ways and watch the mad exodus...
...
verizonccemp

Oct 27, 2004, 12:01 PM
I agree. I own the 710 and my wife has the 6000 and I will agree that in low light or when viewing pix on the phone that quality suffers. However when viewed in high quality on a computer monitor the 710 does actually win for clarity. The bluetooth was advertised primarily by Motorola or by word of mouth before the actual release. I'm not making excuses but responding to this thread. Neither of these "problems" need the atention asked for at the start of this thread. The phone was placed on hold due to a defect where the camera lens is about 5 degrees to the left
...
wirehead

Oct 27, 2004, 12:42 PM
verizonccemp said:
I agree. I own the 710 and my wife has the 6000 and I will agree that in low light or when viewing pix on the phone that quality suffers. However when viewed in high quality on a computer monitor the 710 does actually win for clarity. The bluetooth was advertised primarily by Motorola or by word of mouth before the actual release. I'm not making excuses but responding to this thread. Neither of these "problems" need the atention asked for at the start of this thread. The phone was placed on hold due to a defect where the camera lens is about 5 degrees to the left


Umm.. You must not be accustomed to the standard cycle of Eagerly Anticipated Hardware.

The first thing to remember ...
(continues)
...
WylieECoyote

Oct 26, 2004, 2:40 PM
verizonccemp said:
Don't you feel a little ridiculous?? Honestly, how were you defrauded? You're nothing more than a spoiled child who wants his way and is lying on the ground, kicking his feet for attention. "It does not matter what the contract says"??? What FRAUD have you been inflicted with. Show me one place where WE (not Motorola) stated other than what this phone was capable of. Get a clue. Get a life. Get real and stop wasting everyone's time. If you don't like the phone, you have the same option to return it as everyone else. Try taking some responsibiity for what YOU signed.

(spoken on behalf of my own opinion and not VZW)


First off, yes I feel ridiculous for beliving Verizon at their ...
(continues)
...
ceo2010

Oct 26, 2004, 2:51 PM
From what I read, the phone does implement Bluetooth, just not the profile we all expected. I guess the suit would have to convince a judge/arbitrator that Verizon knew that the general public's definition of Bluetooth included OBEX support, and Verizon KNOWINGLY did not promote disabling OBEX and tricking consumers into buying the phone, then they would be liable. But as it has been said here 100 times, the literal definition of Bluetooth has been met by Verizon.

Also, with regards to the false advertising, who is liable for that? Moto or Verizon? Is it a loophole that they can get away with and say that the features are carrier dependant, knowing full well that VZW will be the only US carrier carrying the phone and will not suppor...
(continues)
...
nathanjax

Oct 26, 2004, 3:01 PM
WylieECoyote said:
I would not expect to buy a car and find out that it runs on gasoline but in the fine print it says it only uses a nozzle that a specific gas station can provide.


No but it would be like buying a car that says it runs on gasoline, and then to find out you can only put premium in it not any other kind of gasoline.... and that's exactly what i did when i bought my cadillac... can i sue caddilac or make them take my car back?


Come on.....
...
uNt0uChAbLe

Oct 26, 2004, 3:31 PM
WylieECoyote said:
verizonccemp said:All verizon literature states that the phone implements "Bluetooth". "Bluetooth" is "Bluetooth". IT IS A STANDARD. I would not expect to buy a car and find out that it runs on gasoline but in the fine print it says it only uses a nozzle that a specific gas station can provide.
When Verizon made a change to the specification, it is no longer Bluetooth. PERIOD. Why did they make the change? TO BILK THEIR CUSTOMERS BY CHARGING FOR SERVICES THAT THE PHONE WAS ALREADY ABLE TO PROVIDE. THAT my friend is the definition of fraud.



If you really have an appointment to meet with your high profile lawyers then you have wasted your time and money...Here is
...
(continues)
...
WylieECoyote

Oct 26, 2004, 3:59 PM
YOU ARE MISSING THE POINT. If you buy a tooster oven at Walmart do you expect them to have materially changed it? If you buy a car at a dealership do you expect that they have changed the motor from a 8 cylinder to 4 cyclinder? There is NO difference here. They materially changed the features on the phone from the manufacturers specifications.

I DONT CARE HOW THIS WEB SITE DEFINES BLUETOOTH. The REAL definition is from the creators. www.bluetooth.org
The V710 is supposed to implement v1.2 of the the bluetooth protocol. Look it up yourself.

Verizon told me in my 15 day period that they were implementing it in a firmware update. They now claim that they are not.

The neat thing is that once a lawsuit is filed, we can issue subpoen...
(continues)
...
nathanjax

Oct 26, 2004, 4:05 PM
WylieECoyote said:
YOU ARE MISSING THE POINT. If you buy a tooster oven at Walmart do you expect them to have materially changed it? If you buy a car at a dealership do you expect that they have changed the motor from a 8 cylinder to 4 cyclinder? There is NO difference here. They materially changed the features on the phone from the manufacturers specifications.

I DONT CARE HOW THIS WEB SITE DEFINES BLUETOOTH. The REAL definition is from the creators. www.bluetooth.org
The V710 is supposed to implement v1.2 of the the bluetooth protocol. Look it up yourself.

Verizon told me in my 15 day period that they were implementing it in a firmware update. They now claim that they are not.

The neat thing is that once a
...
(continues)
...
wnrussell

Oct 26, 2004, 6:33 PM
Nathanjax:

Imagine buying a new $46,000 car equipped with a Bluetooth communications system and then a $400 phone from Verizon to pair with.

Now think about how you would feel driving around the highways tapping on little buttons to make calls, for months, not being able to use that integrated setup.

You keep waiting for Verizon to fix their phone so that it works like all of the other BT phones on the market, because they tell you a fix is coming.

Put yourself in that drivers seat and tell me how angry you are right now.
...
nathanjax

Oct 26, 2004, 7:09 PM
Hey man, totally understand where your coming from.. everyone has their opinion on what needs to be done about this phone.

I don't know your situation. Don't know why your phone isn't pairing with the car. If you'd like to explain it, maybe i can try to solve it, cause i do work in customer service. My understanding is that only certain cars coming out can only pair with certain phones.. ie cdma network or tdma or gsm. I've been told some cars didn't have cdma technology built in to them.. Again no idea what your situation is.

I was just making a statment, which another person more than backed up on here that i have inserted below. I can understand how everyone feels, but they never stated your phone would work with anything other than...
(continues)
...
wnrussell

Oct 26, 2004, 7:47 PM
I really appreciate your response. What is happening, plain and simple is that the newer cars use BT because the auto makers want to get out of the phone business. Make sense? The phones get obsolete much faster than the cars do.

Now, these cars have dashboard displays that utilize the phone address book, integrate with the phone feature set and do all kinds of fancy stuff, but they rely on file transfer to do that.

Everyone expected this V710 to have the same BT file transfer abilities as the V600 and all of the other Moto BT models. Why wouldn't they?

I just signed a 2 year VZW contract with the purchase of this phone and 3 year lease with BMW.

Hope this helps.
...
nathanjax

Oct 26, 2004, 8:37 PM
wnrussell said:
I really appreciate your response. What is happening, plain and simple is that the newer cars use BT because the auto makers want to get out of the phone business. Make sense? The phones get obsolete much faster than the cars do.

Now, these cars have dashboard displays that utilize the phone address book, integrate with the phone feature set and do all kinds of fancy stuff, but they rely on file transfer to do that.

Everyone expected this V710 to have the same BT file transfer abilities as the V600 and all of the other Moto BT models. Why wouldn't they?

I just signed a 2 year VZW contract with the purchase of this phone and 3 year lease with BMW.

Hope this helps.


I will ...
(continues)
...
BorderBob

Oct 26, 2004, 10:06 PM
We all heard the rumors that VZW would disable the OBEX profiles, that was leaked fairly early in the release of this product.

What concerns me at this point are the rumors that VZW may disable the trans flash capabilities with a firmware update. In that respect I think the case for a lawsuit rises as that capability was clearly advertised.

The other thing that gripes me is the clear dis-ingenuousness of their "security" claim. There is no security issue with this bluetooth, just a financial one.

Oh...and the camera sucks!

b.b.
...
uNt0uChAbLe

Oct 26, 2004, 4:16 PM
No, YOU are missing the point. Bluetooth has always been defined simply as a wireless technology that allows enabled devices to connect with each other. Each way of connection is called a profile. If a device has one of those profiles it is technically a bluetooth device. I am not trying to argue with you but I think you need to focus more on the techs telling you that it would be updated and now its not happening. You will lose in court because the judge will tell you that you should have researched it before you bought it. Do you go to a car dealer, step out and say I want that one, go in and sign the papers and be done? No, you test drive, research, and investigate each and every step of the process. If I buy a toaster at WalMart then I e...
(continues)
...
wirehead

Oct 26, 2004, 8:36 PM
WylieECoyote said:
YOU ARE MISSING THE POINT. If you buy a tooster oven at Walmart do you expect them to have materially changed it? If you buy a car at a dealership do you expect that they have changed the motor from a 8 cylinder to 4 cyclinder? There is NO difference here. They materially changed the features on the phone from the manufacturers specifications.


You'd be surprised about this one.

Engine manufacturers routinely sell engines where the engine is limited to a certain level of power, for a variety of reasons. In consuemr cars, it's usually to match California emissions requirements. Sometimes, it's so that they can sell two engines, different only by the ROM chip in the controller, at t...
(continues)
...
Visioneer

Oct 26, 2004, 9:08 PM
Nicely put 'wirehead'. I agree with you on all counts, and I'd sure hope to have you on my side in a court of law.

Having said that -- I also share Wylies frustration, which is what I think you're hearing from him!
...
wirehead

Oct 26, 2004, 3:34 PM
WylieECoyote said:
First off, yes I feel ridiculous for beliving Verizon at their word. All verizon literature states that the phone implements "Bluetooth". "Bluetooth" is "Bluetooth". IT IS A STANDARD. I would not expect to buy a car and find out that it runs on gasoline but in the fine print it says it only uses a nozzle that a specific gas station can provide.
When Verizon made a change to the specification, it is no longer Bluetooth. PERIOD. Why did they make the change? TO BILK THEIR CUSTOMERS BY CHARGING FOR SERVICES THAT THE PHONE WAS ALREADY ABLE TO PROVIDE. THAT my friend is the definition of fraud.

BTW.. it is not up to me to take responsibility for anything. Verizon needs to take responsibility for alteri
...
(continues)
...
ceo2010

Oct 26, 2004, 4:03 PM
From VZW website:
What are some of the uses of Bluetooth?
Bluetooth can be used to wirelessly synchronize and transfer data among devices. The Bluetooth audio capabilities can be used for cordless telephony and headset applications. Bluetooth can be thought of as a cable replacement technology. The exact functionality provided by a Bluetooth enabled device depends on the Bluetooth profiles included (please see the Bluetooth profile section below for more details).

Does Verizon Wireless offer any Bluetooth-compatible phones?
We are pleased to announce that we currently offer the Motorola V710, which is enabled with Bluetooth® wireless technology. To view information on this handset, visit the Motorola V710 phone overview...
(continues)
...
okletsc

Oct 29, 2004, 1:09 PM
I am not sure, Mr.Coyote, how far you can go with this legally but verizon if not frauding is definitely not being straight. It is simply greedy.

As to our VZW defenders, you are absolutely right in saying that VZW advertises that it supports only those 3 profiles. If we view it differently, it can be said that verizon is blocking all the profiles supported by the phone (as designed by MOT) except those 3.

Someone in this forum bought a cadillac which only runs on premium fuel. Ofcourse you cannot sue cadillac over that bcoz thats how they built it and you should have known that before. But here, my friend, the case is a little different. VZW although says that it only supports those 3 profiles, in reality its denying all the other fea...
(continues)
...
verizonccemp

Oct 27, 2004, 9:19 PM
blockquote>

First off, yes I feel ridiculous for beliving Verizon at their word. All verizon literature states that the phone implements "Bluetooth". "Bluetooth" is "Bluetooth". IT IS A STANDARD. I would not expect to buy a car and find out that it runs on gasoline but in the fine print it says it only uses a nozzle that a specific gas station can provide.
When Verizon made a change to the specification, it is no longer Bluetooth. PERIOD. blockquote>
You know I was in Best Buy the other day and saw a Bluetooth mouse and keyboard. Wouldn't you know the damn thing won't work with my Palm PDA. Both say Bluetooth though. Thats fraud I'm now suing Palm and Best Buy for selling items that say Bluetooth on the box that don't really work to...
(continues)
...
verizonccemp

Oct 27, 2004, 9:20 PM
sorry, didn't separate the quotes!
...
nathanjax

Oct 27, 2004, 9:21 PM
verizonccemp said:
You know I was in Best Buy the other day and saw a Bluetooth mouse and keyboard. Wouldn't you know the damn thing won't work with my Palm PDA. Both say Bluetooth though. Thats fraud I'm now suing Palm and Best Buy for selling items that say Bluetooth on the box that don't really work together. By the way, no I didn't research the item before I bought it but thats Best Buys fault for not telling me at the checkout. Just because its Bluetooth doesn't mean it will work with any other bluetooth device. As I said earlier in my post, Get a clue. It's not a STANDARD as you say.


Come on now.. it's like beating a dead horse Very Happy kinda funny thoguh
...
ceo2010

Oct 28, 2004, 8:27 AM
We all know it isn't a standard, but it has to do more with general public believes to be true.

The general public has a perception of what Bluetooth is. On a mobile phone, it syncs to your computer to sync contacts adn transfer data. On a mouse, it connects to my computer to control the pointer. Now if I bought the mouse that advertised BT, but it didn't connect to my computer, only to my Microsoft PDA for some reason (but does connect to the computer using a usb cable. That would falsely be advertising the bluetooth functionality because a bt mouse is supposed to connect with your computer, unless otherwise stated.

Anyway, this topic has been beaten up too much. I am waiting to hear from the high profile lawyers in DC and wh...
(continues)
...
SpecialEd

Oct 28, 2004, 8:51 AM
You've got my support.

I've been a loyal Verizon customer since 97 and I am disgusted at their greed and selfishness.

I've even had some of the tech's in the stores admit their greedy crippled on their phones.
...
wirehead

Oct 28, 2004, 10:10 AM
ceo2010 said:
We all know it isn't a standard, but it has to do more with general public believes to be true.
.


Ahh, but what the "public perceives" as Bluetooth is nothing you can sue over.
...
ceo2010

Oct 28, 2004, 10:17 AM
Correct, but you can loose a business over.
...
takingontheworld

Nov 7, 2004, 8:10 PM
Let me clarify something...there are standards for Bluetooth. Go to : https://www.bluetooth.org/foundry/adopters/do cument/Bluetooth_Core_Specification_v1.2 and you can read all 1200 pages about the core specs on BT v1.2 (I am sure Verizon's attorneys are).
But let’s start with this, (I am giving everyone a quick lesson in consumer law) Motorola advertised the phone as having full functional Bluetooth and many other features that Verizon has chosen to cripple(all of which has been documented), and Verizon did nothing to counter these advertisements to alert the general public to the changes(which is also a documanted fact). This unfortunately gives many consumers more than enough ground to start a class action lawsuit and there is no dou...
(continues)
...
uNt0uChAbLe

Nov 8, 2004, 1:01 AM
Oh geez lets not start this again. VZW never advertised the v710 as having "all out, totally unlocked, fully functional" bluetooth. The simply advertised it as bluetooth. I mean I have a Microsoft bluetooth mouse and keyboard but, wouldnt you know it, I cant get the darn mouse and/or keyboard to connect to the internet. I cant even get it to connect in my Acura...Geez maybe I should sue Microsoft for selling me this POS keyboard and mouse because it cant connect with those bluetooth devices...Get my point?


... Shocked
...
TxDrifter

Oct 29, 2004, 3:33 PM
Bluetooth would be a standard but only based on the frequency and the communication protocols it might use, not the features of the equipment?

I don't think it is fraud on Verizon's part, but I do think it is reminiscient of monopolistic tactics. If I remember correctly it used to be on landlines that only the phone companies' phones could be used for (their) fear third party devices would harm the system. It was not really true, only a ploy to force you to lease their phones.

Verizon has eliminated the consumer option to use a hardware feature of a device because of the existance of their proprietary extra cost feature. Eliminating the hardware manufacturer's hardware feature forces you to use their "for cost" feature...
(continues)
...
goatass

Oct 25, 2004, 10:24 PM
halalujah!!! Smile Very Happy Confused Wink
...
jaronspencer

Oct 26, 2004, 7:34 PM
Why doesn't someone just code a BREW app that does what the missing OBEX should and beat Verizon at their own game? Hmmmm?
...
wirehead

Oct 26, 2004, 7:52 PM
Because all BREW apps must be signed and properly approved for the system. And the BREW phone manufacturers have been closing any holes that allow unsigned BREW apps to be uploaded.

So it's harder than that.

Plus, you'd have to spend a LOT of reverse-engineering time figuring out how to get at the relevant bits of hardware.

Basicly, if they manage to hardware-hack it to work properly, it won't be any easier to make a BREW app than to just hack the firmware.
...
smokebreak

Feb 1, 2009, 11:01 AM
I agree Completely, my phone is java capable (rokr z6m) but it is a brew phone thru metro pcs, and i hate the fact i have to use openwave as a browser and cannot run even simple apps..... brew is nothing more than protection to the carrier to ensure that they can milk every cent from their customers, instead of letting them explore their phones capability and find new uses for it. Not to mention the list of brew apps vs. java apps is pathetic to say the least.
...
SpecialEd

Nov 8, 2004, 2:08 AM
Count me in.
Verizon is GREEDY.
...
SpecialEd

Nov 8, 2004, 10:04 AM
This phone is crippled by Verizon, it self scratches and is very expensive.

We do not have to just accept this!
...
SpecialEd

Nov 8, 2004, 10:06 AM
And the Camera is a joke.
I can draw better than it takes photo's.
...
ceo2010

Nov 8, 2004, 12:04 PM
Untouchable is correct with regards to the bluetooth. And yes we all acknowledge VZW is a greedy corporation looking to suck every dime they can from us. And yes, the 710 has its issues. I personally don't think it is something that we can sue over. The only thing you can do is not buy the phone, cancel your service with vzw and go somewhere else. That will teach them. Unfortunately, many of us can not do that. We have to just take it in the kiester.

All I can say is that when my contract is up for renewal, I am seriously considering dropping vzw, but the grass isn't greener on the other side in this case. It is a damn shame we are all getting **** on...
...

You must log in to reply.

Please log in to report a message to the moderator.


all discussions

Subscribe to Phone Scoop News with RSS Follow @phonescoop on Twitter Phone Scoop on Facebook Subscribe to Phone Scoop on YouTube Follow on Instagram

 

All content Copyright 2001-2015 Phone Factor, LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Content on this site may not be copied or republished without formal permission.
2