I agree with all who feel deceived by Verizon about Bluetooth
For most people (especially those who had a chance to experience higher level of cell phone functionality that can be seen in Europe, where you can pay for a parking meter or get a soda from a vending machine using your bluetooth enabled phone) this phone is very crippled. If the phone is "bluetooth enabled" you should be able to expect some basic functionality. For example, my local CVS allows you to print prints from your camera and accepts a CD, all flash cards varieties as well as a bluetooth connection as an option to upload the images. It does not work with V710 as the file transfer is not possible. Also a very basic expectation is that you will be able to sync with Outloook via BT. And too be honest most of users expected that they wi...
(continues)
(continues)
...
Yeah the BT on the Verizon v710 is as useless as a camera phone for the blind. lol 🤣
...
Mobile Phone Tools 2.0 from Motorola is supposed to restore the OBEX profile and allow full Bluetooth usage.
...
Why is it that so few people on this forum see the danger with bluetooth allowing file transfer. it is called "bluesnarfing". Information can be stolen from your phone, malicious SMS messages can be sent, calender info can be modified without the phone owner even knowing. Someone can also send corrupted bluetooth messages to your phone that would crash the operating system. Another nice feature of bluetooth is the fact that if someone cracked you pin# they could use your own phone to eavesdrop on your conversations.
I certainly would not want any of those things to happen. Nokia and several other manufactures even admitted that they know of the problem and Nokia made a public statement that they have no plans to correct the problem. ...
(continues)
I certainly would not want any of those things to happen. Nokia and several other manufactures even admitted that they know of the problem and Nokia made a public statement that they have no plans to correct the problem. ...
(continues)
...
I highly doubt that Verizon's interest was related to bluesnarfing. It is a lot more likely that their interest was in forcing people to use their service to send pictures rather than just download them with Bluetooth to their computers.
The Motorola V710 cannot even do a Bluetooth sync of its phone book to Outlook without the new OBEX-enabled Phone Tools 2.0.
My understanding of Bluetooth hijacking is limited, but I thought hijacking was only possible if the snarfer knew the code that links devices. Changing the default code, if possible, would prevent hijacking. Or so I understood.
Gregg Hill
The Motorola V710 cannot even do a Bluetooth sync of its phone book to Outlook without the new OBEX-enabled Phone Tools 2.0.
My understanding of Bluetooth hijacking is limited, but I thought hijacking was only possible if the snarfer knew the code that links devices. Changing the default code, if possible, would prevent hijacking. Or so I understood.
Gregg Hill
...
First of all that is a problem with Bluetooth in general. If a customer want's bluetooth he should be able to get bluetooth even with all its downsides. If verizon wishes to protect their customer from bluetoothsnarfing (which is extreamly difficult and requires a lot of equipment to catch and crack the blue tooth encryption) then they should say "Due to security of our handsets and protection of our customers we restrict file transfers on our Blue tooth devices". Even WIFI has the same problem but people still use it.
...
Did VZW ever advertise that you could do BT file transfers with the Moto 710?? Let me answer for you, NO they did not, they said that you could use a BT headset with it. Companies set limits on what thier products can do all the time, even though it may be capable of much more.
Case in point is my wife's car. I wanted to see how fast it would go, I got it up to 120 mph and it hit a governer, the cars computer cut my ability to accelerate anymore. The car was clearly capable for going faster since the needle on the speedometer was moving very rapidly right up until the car 120mph. GM should not put such a restriction on MY CAR, after all I paid them good money for it, why should they be able to say I cannot go over 120 mph??
FY...
(continues)
Case in point is my wife's car. I wanted to see how fast it would go, I got it up to 120 mph and it hit a governer, the cars computer cut my ability to accelerate anymore. The car was clearly capable for going faster since the needle on the speedometer was moving very rapidly right up until the car 120mph. GM should not put such a restriction on MY CAR, after all I paid them good money for it, why should they be able to say I cannot go over 120 mph??
FY...
(continues)
...
That is the lamest friggin excuse I have ever heard.
Maybe car makers should build cars out cotton so people don't get hurt if someone hits then.
If you are gonna make an excuse make it a good one.
Maybe car makers should build cars out cotton so people don't get hurt if someone hits then.
If you are gonna make an excuse make it a good one.
...
jhmlbrgr said:...
Did VZW ever advertise that you could do BT file transfers with the Moto 710?? Let me answer for you, NO they did not, they said that you could use a BT headset with it. Companies set limits on what thier products can do all the time, even though it may be capable of much more.
Case in point is my wife's car. I wanted to see how fast it would go, I got it up to 120 mph and it hit a governer, the cars computer cut my ability to accelerate anymore. The car was clearly capable for going faster since the needle on the speedometer was moving very rapidly right up until the car 120mph. GM should not put such a restriction on MY CAR, after all I paid them good money for it, why should they be able to say
(continues)
...
Yes there are saftey/security/privacy concerns with blue tooth. It is called bluetoothsnarfing and if you do an internet search you can finds all kinds of articles that say how a fully capable blue tooth phone can be easily hacked. Someone could crash the software on the phone, steal your address book, send malicious text messages, use your phone as a listening devise and eaves drop on your conversation, all without the phone owner ever even knowing. And if these things happen, especially sending you a malicious file that would crash you operating system, who is the customer going to hold responsible for their phone not working, THE CARRIER. VZW is protecting there customers and themselves. Once blue tooth becomes a more secure technolo...
(continues)
(continues)
...
Actually, I'm fully conversant with Bluesnarfing, up to and including the fact that at DefCon this summer a world record was set by snagging the address book from a Nokia from 1.1 miles away using a modified Yagi. However, there is no security or liability risk TO THE CARRIER as BT works independently of the carrier's network. Bluesnarfing can occur simply by another BT device being in the same room with yours and you not being smart enough to have the device set to hide mode (or it's a Nokia, which is a different issue altogether.) Trying to say the carrier bears any liability for damage to a BT phone incurred by a proximity attack holds about as much water as trying to sue the carrier if you're mugged and the thief stomps up and down on...
(continues)
(continues)
...
Since Verizon sells the phones it would be very easy for a lawyer to place blame on the carrier as well.
...
southwestcomm said:
Since Verizon sells the phones it would be very easy for a lawyer to place blame on the carrier as well.
And on the whole group that invented Bluetooth to begin with, right?
I am wondering why Motorola has not been sued for releasing the V600, V525, V620, V551, V505, V80 or RAZR V3.
And why Linksys has not been held accountable for their 80211.b/g/a home networks too.
Still sounds like a Verizon scam to me...
...
Yeah... a lawyer that knows you're dumb enough to pay him big $$ to fight a losing case... It would never slide... It would be like suing Microsoft because your netscape crashed... Or better yet suing dell because your maching was accessed without authorization...
Now, back to VZW w/ bluetooth... Doesn't matter how much they restrict bluetooth... It's obvious that not enough of VZW customer base cares about bluetooth... Since it's not effecting their churn... Which will probably just encourage them to restrict and try to charge for more and more features.
Now, back to VZW w/ bluetooth... Doesn't matter how much they restrict bluetooth... It's obvious that not enough of VZW customer base cares about bluetooth... Since it's not effecting their churn... Which will probably just encourage them to restrict and try to charge for more and more features.
...
Boy, forget to mark a comment as "smart @ss" and get flamed....
Yes, I agree it would be hard to hold Verizon accountable.
Yes, I agree it would be hard to hold Verizon accountable.
...
The probem is that there are about a million BT cars hitting the streets per year that can't communicate with any Verizon phone.
I'm not a lawyer, not am I taking a battle that way. I'm just a faithful Verizon customer who can't get a promise from my carrier.
When you buy a new car with an integrated phone system, you will see how I feel then.
The market will eventually dictate. Verizon, with 50 million customers, just doesn't care about 2% of them right now.
I'm not a lawyer, not am I taking a battle that way. I'm just a faithful Verizon customer who can't get a promise from my carrier.
When you buy a new car with an integrated phone system, you will see how I feel then.
The market will eventually dictate. Verizon, with 50 million customers, just doesn't care about 2% of them right now.
...
speck said:
Yeah... a lawyer that knows you're dumb enough to pay him big $$ to fight a losing case... It would never slide... It would be like suing Microsoft because your netscape crashed... Or better yet suing dell because your maching was accessed without authorization...
Now, back to VZW w/ bluetooth... Doesn't matter how much they restrict bluetooth... It's obvious that not enough of VZW customer base cares about bluetooth... Since it's not effecting their churn... Which will probably just encourage them to restrict and try to charge for more and more features.
This is not true. It is affecting their customer base you would be so suprised how many people call about a BT phone and how many custom...
(continues)
...
YES THEY DO. VZW Advertises BT on their phone. Infact they even put the Bluetooth registered trademark on as a feature of their phone. BT technology adverties file transfers therefore YES. VZW does adverties file transfers because they do not state you cannot when one of the functions of BT IS file transfers that is advertised on the bluetooth website.
...
I agree. Here's what the VZW website ADVERTISES about the v710:
" The Motorola V710 is a phone and a whole lot more. Featuring an integrated 1.2 megapixel camera, video capture, playback and messaging to any email address, and Mobile Web 2.0, it's a phone that is designed for the way you live. And with Bluetooth wireless technology, you can make hands-free, eyes-free calls, and connect to your PC or PDA whenever and wherever you want. "
sorry, this implies that you can do file transfers when you hook up to your PC.
" The Motorola V710 is a phone and a whole lot more. Featuring an integrated 1.2 megapixel camera, video capture, playback and messaging to any email address, and Mobile Web 2.0, it's a phone that is designed for the way you live. And with Bluetooth wireless technology, you can make hands-free, eyes-free calls, and connect to your PC or PDA whenever and wherever you want. "
sorry, this implies that you can do file transfers when you hook up to your PC.
...
it also implies that you can connect to your pc to connect to the internet, whic is what the 710 is abled to do
...
You are right! Bluetooth is a short range wireless networking technology that uses the same frequency band (2.4 GHz) as 802.11b wireless networks.
Imagine buying a 802.11b wireless notebook computer and taking it home with you, only to learn that it could not transfer files over your network.
You'd be angry, right? What if you could return that device, but you were stuck with a 2 year service agreement that you could not void.
Now how about if the manufacturer kept promising a fix, but the dealer could tell you nothing about that fix?
Imagine buying a 802.11b wireless notebook computer and taking it home with you, only to learn that it could not transfer files over your network.
You'd be angry, right? What if you could return that device, but you were stuck with a 2 year service agreement that you could not void.
Now how about if the manufacturer kept promising a fix, but the dealer could tell you nothing about that fix?
...
wnrussell said:
Imagine buying a 802.11b wireless notebook computer and taking it home with you, only to learn that it could not transfer files over your network.
Kinda like buying a Centrino, right? Friend of mine bought one of those crippled pieces of poo and we tested it head to head against my PCMCIA card and I can pull in a hotspot from a LOT farther away than he can, and he lost a slot to boot! Thanks Intel! 🙄
...
HOw is the Centrino (which is only a braqnd name for any laptop with an INtel Wifi card inside) crippled? The PCMIA card has an EXTERNAL antennae that would be the only reason there might be more reception.
...
kingfrog77 said:Basically you just repeated what he just said. Good job.
HOw is the Centrino (which is only a braqnd name for any laptop with an INtel Wifi card inside) crippled? The PCMIA card has an EXTERNAL antennae that would be the only reason there might be more reception.
...
But the grasp of the basics is there--it's all one can ask! At any rate, any decent LinkSys 802.11x card should be able to at least see a hot spot from up to 600 feet line of sight (although it would need to be a lot closer to associate.) Best the Centrino laptop can manage is catching a VERY strong router/cable modem signal from about thirty-forty feet away, but often can't associate with it. Dunno what they did to it when they put the chipset in, but when I can drive around and find a Starbucks faster via my laptop than I can by seeing the signs coming up and he can't access a wide open access point from a few feet away, it's not exactly rocket surgery to figure out that Intel isn't too happy about enabling WiFi hackers...
...
I went to this one small town where they had a Starbucks and asked the to make sure they had Wi-Fi. And they looked at ME like was an idiot. You know that stare "what the hell are you talkin bout". So i just left. I figured if they dont know what they have, would they get my order right?
...
if you can walk out of starbucks without getting something you have more restraint than i!
...
bluesnarfing? why havnt i heard any of those issues with cingular att or t-mo's bluetooth? 🙄
...
Of course no one is going to say we have this cool phone, but be aware that all these bad things can happen to you. They are only going to tell you the positives.
Do a google search. There are a ton of articles about it. Nokia came out and staed publicly that they are aware of the potential for bluesnarfing, but have no plans to make the technology more secure. They are basically just in it for the money. Developing the software further to make it more secure would obviously cost a lot of money that Nokia is not interestd in spending, since it wouyld not result in any additional profites for them.
Do a google search. There are a ton of articles about it. Nokia came out and staed publicly that they are aware of the potential for bluesnarfing, but have no plans to make the technology more secure. They are basically just in it for the money. Developing the software further to make it more secure would obviously cost a lot of money that Nokia is not interestd in spending, since it wouyld not result in any additional profites for them.
...
greggmh123 said:
Mobile Phone Tools 2.0 from Motorola is supposed to restore the OBEX profile and allow full Bluetooth usage.
That was the claim from the beginning, but it did not.
Then there is the BT car problem. About a million cars on the road with integrated Bluetooth. Verizon does not offer a phone that has the regular BT profiles needed to synch with those cars for safe operation.
...
I emailed Motorola several months ago and they said PT2.0 would restore the OBEX profile. I don't have the V710, so no way to test. Are you saying that you have installed Phone Tools 2.0 and it did not restore the profile? I'd call Motorola to find out why it does not do so.
Gregg Hill
Gregg Hill
...
greggmh123 said:
I emailed Motorola several months ago and they said PT2.0 would restore the OBEX profile. I don't have the V710, so no way to test. Are you saying that you have installed Phone Tools 2.0 and it did not restore the profile? I'd call Motorola to find out why it does not do so.
I did. The MPT is a computer software product, not meant for cars. We need a firmware update for the phone. Here was Moto's response:
Thank you for contacting Motorola E-mail Support.
Regarding your concern, Motorola develops and designs firmwares according to the specifications of each carrier. As a result, carriers may make changes to a phone, or may ask Motorola to make changes, when it is programmed or serv...
(continues)
...
OK, the car part does not work, but what about a BT link to Outlook? Did they at least fix that problem?
Gregg
Gregg
...
IMHO, look, it's really simple. Verizon has clearly decided to milk a revenue stream out of file transfer.
A couple of examples: my cdm 9900 is a very advanced little piece of equipment yet the only method of file transfer Verizon offers me is Get It Now. Sure I can hack the phone with the usb cord but that clearly contradicts Verizon's intent and they don't make it easy. I haven't tried it yet so I don't even know the extent of how difficult it is.
Also, I pay 5 bucks a month for web access but I'm also charged minutes if I use the service during peak hours. So they get me both ways if I actually try to use the service during business hours which is when this service might be most likely to help pay for itself.
There's a very clear...
(continues)
A couple of examples: my cdm 9900 is a very advanced little piece of equipment yet the only method of file transfer Verizon offers me is Get It Now. Sure I can hack the phone with the usb cord but that clearly contradicts Verizon's intent and they don't make it easy. I haven't tried it yet so I don't even know the extent of how difficult it is.
Also, I pay 5 bucks a month for web access but I'm also charged minutes if I use the service during peak hours. So they get me both ways if I actually try to use the service during business hours which is when this service might be most likely to help pay for itself.
There's a very clear...
(continues)
...
BigPhony said:
There's a very clear pattern of intent here. So when they release a phone that advertises Bluetooth and then they block most of its functionality, their motivation is clear. It's like selling an FM radio that only recieves 1 station. Yes, it uses radio technology but not in any way that anyone would acknowledge justifies calling the product a proper FM radio.
Actually, the V710 only offers 3 of the 15 functions that Bluetooth supports. If you dig deep enough into the VZY website, you will find this page that should have been printed and fully disclosed right on the box: http://www.verizonwireless.com/b2c/faq/blueto othprofile.jsp
...
While VZW probably did nothing illegal they have leveraged a strategy that reminds me of Apple's initial strategy of devloping software that was closed to developers' innovations.
The strategy backfired and they eventually opened the door to others which resulted in increased sales for Apple.
The strategy backfired and they eventually opened the door to others which resulted in increased sales for Apple.
...
Huh? 😕
What does amputating whole chunks of bluetooth's functionality to nickle and dime customers have to do with Apple creating proprietary software?
Verizon is creating nothing. They are employing and limiting an already existing standard in a self-serving manner and, in effect, baiting and switching customers into thinking they're getting bluetooth functionality when all they're getting is a wireless earphone.
I agree that Apple has made some unfortunate marketing decisions in the past, but there is no analogy here. What would be analogous would be if, say, Apple advertised that it supported USB but created some non-standard Apple only version that required you to buy only their version of USB. With Apple any USB device will work...
(continues)
What does amputating whole chunks of bluetooth's functionality to nickle and dime customers have to do with Apple creating proprietary software?
Verizon is creating nothing. They are employing and limiting an already existing standard in a self-serving manner and, in effect, baiting and switching customers into thinking they're getting bluetooth functionality when all they're getting is a wireless earphone.
I agree that Apple has made some unfortunate marketing decisions in the past, but there is no analogy here. What would be analogous would be if, say, Apple advertised that it supported USB but created some non-standard Apple only version that required you to buy only their version of USB. With Apple any USB device will work...
(continues)
...
are you people some how confused with the idea of difference in service provider and phone manufacturer?
...
Go ahead... Clear things up... With this statement you're implying that the manufacturer chose to restrict only VZW bluetooth phones... You know that's crap. VZW asked the manufacturer to add these restrictions... and it has nothing to do with the security flaws for bluetooth so the other guy trying to play that off is also full of crap.
With all the software flaws cell phones have and the potential for malicious acts to be done to them... I highly doubt VZW is restricting bluetooth for the interest of the customer... That's almost like saying Because the internet has security flaws... Earthlink has asked internic to restrict all internet activity for earthlink users.
Whatever honest reason they decided to restrict bluetooth... i've no...
(continues)
With all the software flaws cell phones have and the potential for malicious acts to be done to them... I highly doubt VZW is restricting bluetooth for the interest of the customer... That's almost like saying Because the internet has security flaws... Earthlink has asked internic to restrict all internet activity for earthlink users.
Whatever honest reason they decided to restrict bluetooth... i've no...
(continues)
...
OH CRY ME A RIVER... BOO FREAKINWHOO, $2.99 per mo for pix messages! Shut up and pay for the service you cheap-skate! The v710 will have a new flash, and will open up more bluetooth options.. but not xfering of pictures. If you want something that's not restricted, get yourself a seperate digital camera!
...
barryefau said:
OH CRY ME A RIVER... BOO FREAKINWHOO, $2.99 per mo for pix messages! Shut up and pay for the service you cheap-skate! The v710 will have a new flash, and will open up more bluetooth options.. but not xfering of pictures. If you want something that's not restricted, get yourself a seperate digital camera!
Or Cingular - Obex file transfer is not restricted .
...
the similarity is that VZW is trying to increase revenue by limiting the technology or right to some feature. They learned that in the end they lost customers and revenue. VZW will learn the same over time.
...
sammy2 said:
While VZW probably did nothing illegal they have leveraged a strategy that reminds me of Apple's initial strategy of devloping software that was closed to developers' innovations.
The strategy backfired and they eventually opened the door to others which resulted in increased sales for Apple.
The more basic problem is that the customer service employees are trained to intentionally not firnish useable information:
...
Dear Verizon Wireless Customer,
Thank you for contacting the Verizon Wireless website.
At this time we do not have a time frame as to when a new firmware for the V710 will be available. We apologize for the misinformation, but December 2004 is not the correct
(continues)
...
Assuming a product has specific features when it does not is no way to go about purchasing goods.
Just say "ooops, I guess i'll be checking which profiles are enabled next time."
Also assuming that just because VZW sold the v710 w/ out all profiles enabled it doesn't mean that VZW will never offer a BT phone w/ profiles enabled.
Just say "ooops, I guess i'll be checking which profiles are enabled next time."
Also assuming that just because VZW sold the v710 w/ out all profiles enabled it doesn't mean that VZW will never offer a BT phone w/ profiles enabled.
...
For all of you considering a lawsuit over this product you may wish to consider the MAGNUSON-MOSS WARRANTY IMPROVEMENT ACT. Here are two links that provide information to help you decide the value of going forward.
http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/conline/pubs/buspubs/warranty ... »
http://www.all-ink.com/magnuson-moss.html »
http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/conline/pubs/buspubs/warranty ... »
http://www.all-ink.com/magnuson-moss.html »
...
Also... I know Cingular Arbitrates... I'd imagine that VZW would too... So you wouldn't even be able to sue... You would get to pay your lawyer to sit against VZW 20+ lawyers in front of one man who (let's face it; has special interests) just to hear your plea get denied w/ no appeal... I love contractual agreements. 🙂
This is the same reason everytime I hear someone say "I'm going to get my lawyer and sue you!"
I always get a smile on my face...
This is the same reason everytime I hear someone say "I'm going to get my lawyer and sue you!"
I always get a smile on my face...
...
I had a lady the other day who said she was speaking with her lawyer and he said we were in breach of contract b/c her sms was down... I said ok ma'am is he availible and I can speak with him now, she hung up... 😈
...
JJMcClain said:
I had a lady the other day who said she was speaking with her lawyer and he said we were in breach of contract b/c her sms was down... I said ok ma'am is he availible and I can speak with him now, she hung up... 😈
Bluetooth is a short range wireless networking technology that uses the same frequency band (2.4 GHz) as 802.11b wireless networks.
Imagine buying a 802.11b wireless notebook computer and taking it home with you, only to learn that it could not transfer files over your network.
Now how about if the manufacturer kept promising a fix, but the dealer was clueless about that fix?
Check out the BT Standards for phones at Bluetooth.org and see what profiles you are miss...
(continues)
...
