I completely agree with you but you also have to look at the situation from a business standpoint as well. If a company can find a way to drive revenue into a certain aspect of the company then they will do it. Especially if it puts more money in their pockets. Its all around us, not just with Verizon. We are forced to buy DVDs now because most movies dont even release on VHS tapes anymore. We are forced to buy expensive gas. We are forced to update computers every so often. Cingular customers were forced to buy new phones when they switched from TDMA to GSM technology. You pay per credit in college and you are forced to take a minimum amount of credits. Its all around us whether we like it or not. Even though I agree with you on the VZW/blu...
(continues)

I am not talking about extra services, free premium Cable channels, Socialism 😳 or any other such thing. I just want to pass my data to and from my phone with my data cable. Period. Vzn has locked me out of my own phone's directory and forces me to pay a toll for the privilege of simple access. How can that be defended?

How nice would it be if Vzn released a software update for my 9900 allowing me simple access to my own data? Eventually they'll have to understand that this is not a service or a perk but a basic requirement in a digital age. If it doesn't and its competition does, what do you suppose that will do for it's market share?
BTW I am not affiliated with any wireless company and any attempt to denegrate me rather than address...
(continues)

Yeah... if you complain about VZW, you get branded unamerican or something. I think Jerry Falwell owns VZW. 🤣

Hey now Jerry Falwell is an outstanding American... 😕


Please note the substantial amount of sarcasm used.

uNt0uChAbLe said:
Hey now Jerry Falwell is an outstanding American... 😕


Please note the substantial amount of sarcasm used.

Jerry fallwell scares me

Haha try living in the same city as him and seeing him restraunts and on TV 24/7. Hes a fat bastard (hope I dont get reported for that) that just sits around criticizing gay people. He blamed 9/11 on homosexuals on national TV. Hes the biggest idiot in the world. He even goes as far to restrict certain movies coming to movie theatres here in Lynchburg...He is the 😈

I dont understand Christians like that.

No one does.

I mean, he claimed Shrek 2 was a film from the devil, trying to promote homosexuality.

Yeah...ok buddy...go back to your corner.

JessiCSR said:
I mean, he claimed Shrek 2 was a film from the devil, trying to promote homosexuality.

OMG...bwahahahaha 🤣

Wasn't Falwell also the idiot who thought the Teletubbies were gay? Now its Shrek? Falwell seems to have gay on the brain.

I mean, geez, you can't even call him a sub-moron, because that'd be an insult to sub-morons. 😳

lol, this discussion went into major "SIDE-BAR" mode. LOL

Being european I find that americans have to much time on their hands and so they mess with other people's lives, whether it will be their own or other countries. I watch these Family Firsters and the Churchey's from the midwest and they are so out of touch with reality. Their values why masked under a different veil aren't all that different from the Theocracy's of the middle east.

Can we get an Ay-MEN! 🤣

Dan717 said:
Being european I find that americans have to much time on their hands and so they mess with other people's lives, whether it will be their own or other countries. I watch these Family Firsters and the Churchey's from the midwest and they are so out of touch with reality. Their values why masked under a different veil aren't all that different from the Theocracy's of the middle east.

Mmm... that's a pretty big blanket statement and it has some rather large holes in it.

First off, Americans actually have less time on their hands than most others, because we work more hours per week than most other industrialized countries. We see something like France's 35-hour work week and can only look on ...
(continues)

BetterThanJake said:

Second, America is a deeply divided country when it comes to values. Yes, in the South and Midwest 'Bible Belt' areas, there are a lot of Churchies, who, IMO, don't have a clue and who are pretty hypocritical when it comes to things like sex. But on the coasts or in any large urban area, you have a lot of people with a much more sophisticated and realistic world-view.

Jake! Dont drop stories in my opinion of you! There are plenty of people who would be considered "churchies" who are progressive thinkers, and have a fine world view. Sterotyping like that really isnt your style...

Thats a fair criticism. I guess I get so used to seeing the Jerry Falwells and Pat Robertsons, that I miss the normal, non-insane religious types.

However, some of this is their fault as well. They seem to let their voices be drowned out by the Falwells and the Robertsons. Its not competely unlike the situation with the Muslim religion... there's a 'silent majority' of fairly peaceful folk being drowned out by the radicals and terrorists. Unless moderate churchies stand up and are heard, the conservative Christians are going to keep pretending that they are the face of American Christianity, to strong effect.

Well i think you can be conservative and still totally not relate to falwell or robertson.

I dont think silent majority is the problem. People need to seek out the truth before judging a group.

One of my problems with falwell and robertson is that they shove thier thoughts and beliefs on everyone. My thoughts and beliefs are mine, and arent usually extended to anyone but those who are genuinely interested in me as a person.

Thanks Jake...

I dont think silent majority is the problem. People need to seek out the truth before judging a group.

Oh, I do have some direct experience with this, shaded... I grew up in an ultraconservative Catholic family, and attended 9 years of Catholic school, including one school where John Birch Society members were allowed to come in and speak to the students about how "evil communist kids" our age in China and Russia were learning how to use guns so that they could come over here and kill us.

And the nuns just stood there while they spoke, smiling. 😳

BetterThanJake said:

I dont think silent majority is the problem. People need to seek out the truth before judging a group.

Oh, I do have some direct experience with this, shaded... I grew up in an ultraconservative Catholic family, and attended 9 years of Catholic school, including one school where John Birch Society members were allowed to come in and speak to the students about how "evil communist kids" our age in China and Russia were learning how to use guns so that they could come over here and kill us.

And the nuns just stood there while they spoke, smiling. 😳

heh...again, this may be an extreme, not the norm 😉

I sure hope so. But when you see christian apocalypse literature like the 'Left Behind' series selling 60 million copies total, you have to start to believe that maybe there is a large cult-like subgroup within American Christianity.

BetterThanJake said:
I sure hope so. But when you see christian apocalypse literature like the 'Left Behind' series selling 60 million copies total, you have to start to believe that maybe there is a large cult-like subgroup within American Christianity.

Or...... a bunch of people that realise that those are *fictional* novels...

You have to understand shaded... I have family members who believe in all that stuff. I've been warned that there's "going to be nine days of darkness" and not to go outside when it happens or I'll die. Stuff like that. 😳

I don't think its coincidence that there's no shortage of evangelical nutjob preachers out there with large followings.

And this has what to do with the subject line?
Or Verizon, for that matter?
If you use the subject line it will help keep the threads organized.

Good point! 🙂

Not every topic stays perfectly on-topic, BP. But point taken 😉

That sounds like the nutjobs that scream at me that I'm going to hell because I play MtG... Dang Dueteronomy... lol

Yup, Falwell is indeed an idiot. He's the American version of the Taliban, and doesn't even realize it. I really wish the GOP would stop kissing his fat, completely unAmerican behind 🙄

Thank you!!

And THAT my friends is why I turned down a full scholarship to Liberty University. I refuse to deal with idiots like Falwell. Dealing with someone who wants everything for free is one thing, but calling a Teletubby GAY????

Falwell IS the devil.

You do have access to your own data. It is through the VZW network, and of course if you are using spectrum you have to pay for that use. Spectrum is the main money maker for wirelss company. Thye cannot let you use it for free.

ok I work for cingular and I will back up verizon on this one. when you buy an internet ready computer you dont get free internet. when you buy a tv you dont get cable for free.
you buy a product the services to run it cost money. profit is not illegal, or immoral, its capatalism. do you pay for the voice services of your phone? why not accuse verizon of extorsion because you bought a phone and the voice services require a monthly charge. idiots like you make me sick

Maybe you should see a doctor.

If you scew your analogy to fit your point you're missing mine. I don't want anything for free. I've said so numerous times. All I want is the freedom to use the equipment that I have already paid for without having to...
(continues)

Well said.

Wow.

I don't know if I should add to that or just say "wow"

There is indeed a difference between services and hardware. That analogy was awesome.

Why than is my car limited, by GM, to a maximum speed, by a regulator? My car obviously capable of going faster than 120 mph, but the manufacturer put a regulator on it so I cannot make it go any faster than that.
Automobile manufactures = extortion.
It is the same thing that you are saying. Although if I ask the manufacturer I am sure they are going to say safety reasons is why. Just like you with the cell phone I say that is BS. I want my car to be able to reach a true top speed not a limited one, and I should not have to pay extra money to modify the car ti make it reach that true top speed.

jhmlbrgr said:
Why than is my car limited, by GM, to a maximum speed, by a regulator? My car obviously capable of going faster than 120 mph, but the manufacturer put a regulator on it so I cannot make it go any faster than that.
Automobile manufactures = extortion.
It is the same thing that you are saying. Although if I ask the manufacturer I am sure they are going to say safety reasons is why. Just like you with the cell phone I say that is BS. I want my car to be able to reach a true top speed not a limited one, and I should not have to pay extra money to modify the car ti make it reach that true top speed.

I don't think that's what he's getting at, though. He's saying (in car talk) if you bu...
(continues)

bizkitsngravy said:
I don't think that's what he's getting at, though. He's saying (in car talk) if you buy and install the regulator for your car which allows you to choose your governor's speed limit, you should be able to do so (without being charged a fee by GM, either monthly or one time). OR if you removed the governor, GM shouldn't disable the car from running.However, I don't think he'd argue with having to pay for *Onstar, even though the car is equipped with it.

Yes, you get me.
A certain amount of limitation is unavoidable in all hardware. The question is when does it stop being because of safety, legal limitation or funcionality conflict, and start being because the service provider wants to generate ...
(continues)

jhmlbrgr said:
Why than is my car limited, by GM, to a maximum speed, by a regulator? My car obviously capable of going faster than 120 mph, but the manufacturer put a regulator on it so I cannot make it go any faster than that.
Automobile manufactures = extortion.
It is the same thing that you are saying.

Is that really a great analogy, though? How many roads in the US can you legally drive 120 on? None. You'd have to take said car to the track. But a good chunk of the people who buy a phone with data transfer abilities would expect to be able to actually USE them. That's just normal use. Driving 120 isn't.

Actually, I take a little of that back... apparently in Montana for a couple of years in the mid-90s, there was no speed limit, except at night.

Probably the only fun thing about Montana 🙂

This is true. I live in MT and at one time the speed limit was "a safe and prudent" speed. So as long as the weather was good you could go roughly 90 mph and not have to worry. And if you did get pulled over, like i did, you only got a $5 ticket. LOL. So everyday when i was driving my mustang cobra i made sure i carried a few $5 bills in the glove box. I only got pulled over a few times. But the one i do recall i was going 130 when i was clocked and when i got pulled over the cop said, "Do you really think that's a SAFE speed?" I said no of course, paid him the $5, and went on my way.

And yes this was probably the only fun thing about Montana.

When did this thread turn to what is legal? If I went by your rational than any cars sold in PA should not be able to go over 65 mph since there are no roads with higher speed limits than that in the state. That is just an absurd statement. Anyone can actually drive as fast as they want, anywhere. It is only illegal if you get caught.


Back to the point:
The phone never was advertised as capable of data transfer. BigPhony is making an assumption that since he can buy a data cable that he should be able to transfer any and all data in the phone. This is not the case. The data cable and software that VZW sell for there phones is advertised to give you the ability to transfer the contact information and give you the ability to use...
(continues)

Every time I goes to the gas station to get gas I always get ripped off by the because I always think that all the other fluids in my are getting going to get replenshied. Why would I not assume that? There is a hose coming out of a box and into my car

Why should he not assume that he would be able to transfer data using the data cable? It's not like he's trying to steal anything, just organize, make back-up's, sync etc...It shouldn't have to do with the network at all. For example at T-Mobile if you have a phone that can use a data cable: you can download the software from our site to your computer for free, or purchase a kit which comes with a cd, and the specific usb cable you need for your phone for $38.00-$60.00 (depending on your phone model). Do all the transferring you need. That data cable/software would even allow you to use that phone as a modem to make an internet conncetion for your pc.

However, without an internet package for $19.99 add-on if that's how you intend on usin...
(continues)

jhmlbrgr said:
When did this thread turn to what is legal? If I went by your rational than any cars sold in PA should not be able to go over 65 mph since there are no roads with higher speed limits than that in the state. That is just an absurd statement. Anyone can actually drive as fast as they want, anywhere. It is only illegal if you get caught.

C'mon jh... driving 120 obviously goes far beyond simply being a legal matter. Its also a safety issue, as in, a lot of ppl would kill themselves driving at that speed. My grandma couldn't safely drive at that speed, could yours? Would you really want her to try?

The point is, driving 120+ ISN'T normal use. Being able to use your hardware's built-in data...
(continues)

Everything has a price, GSM carriers haven't crippled file transferring YET. But it will be interesting to see what Cingular does now that is has more control over handset modifications. Verizon Wireless has had final say on all of their handsets, as to what they can and can't do, the postioning of the VZW logo, etc. Cingular never had that luxury (if you don't believe me on this check RCRNEWS once in a while.) up until now. IF your the underdog, you need to give as much as possible to gain marketshare. And even though Cingular has now taken over Verizon in customer base, Verizon still adds significantly more customers per quarter than Cingular and ATT combined. So they have to be doing something right, maybe they are upsetting a few people ...
(continues)

VZW_insider said:
Everything has a price, GSM carriers haven't crippled file transferring YET. But it will be interesting to see what Cingular does now that is has more control over handset modifications. Verizon Wireless has had final say on all of their handsets, as to what they can and can't do, the postioning of the VZW logo, etc. Cingular never had that luxury (if you don't believe me on this check RCRNEWS once in a while.) up until now. IF your the underdog, you need to give as much as possible to gain marketshare. And even though Cingular has now taken over Verizon in customer base, Verizon still adds significantly more customers per quarter than Cingular and ATT combined. So they have to be doing something right,

...
(continues)

WOW An intelligent and bipartisan post!!!!!! Very good, Bravo, bravo

And I am not being sarcastic.

Umm Satellite would be just the same so theres no difference. With satellite you have to pay more for certain packages and even more for premium channels and then turn around and buy completely different and more expensive box for HDTV. And even then you have to buy the satellite dish and a box for every room if you want different channels playing in different rooms.

I'm not talking about paying extra for premium services, I'm talking about one company unilaterally overcharging for the exact same services a different company can provide at a lower cost with less hassle. Also, satellite TV companies subsidize equipment just like wireless providers--I have yet to pay a penny for my box and dish. Finally, I pay 40.00 a month for over 150 channels, and I could get every premium available out there for at most another 35.00, and my friends are paying 60.00 a month to Comcast for fewer channels than I get with NO premium channels at all. As I said, market forces will mandate a change in policy in an arrogant company that thinks it has a monopoly on its services. Did I mention that my friends are dropping C...
(continues)

You also have to think about where a person lives. If someone lives in a really rural area then satellite is all they can get but DSL might not be available. Having DSL service depends on how close you are to the Central Office of the provider. After that range you pretty much are screwed especially if you cant get cable out to where you live. I personally pay 60 a month for digital cable with a DVR and cable internet thru Adelphia. It would be much more expensive for me to have satellite and DSL. You are right though, Comcast does sound expensive but keep in mind that they may be renting lines from other companies to provide the cable which is why their prices may be a little bit higher.

uNt0uChAbLe said:
You also have to think about where a person lives. If someone lives in a really rural area then satellite is all they can get but DSL might not be available. Having DSL service depends on how close you are to the Central Office of the provider.

Actually, it's dependant on how close you are to a switching station. I used to tech SBC Yahoo DSL...

The reason I used the analogy I did is because I mentioned about VZW charging extra to use services other than voice. He made it sound like just because he bought the phone that all the features of the network should be able to be used at no extra charge. That is why their are voice services and data services. Not everyone needs the data services so why built it into the price of the plans, just charge the extra to the people who will actually us it.

The reason I used the analogy I did is because I mentioned about VZW charging extra to use services other than voice. He made it sound like just because he bought the phone that all the features of the network should be able to be used at no extra charge. That is why their are voice services and data services. Not everyone needs the data services so why built it into the price of the plans, just charge the extra to the people who will actually us it.

Yes, and my point is that your analogy is antiquated and incorrect. The days when a telephone was about voice and voice alone are over and that is the result of wireless phone companies and their own marketing. Also, I'm not talking about a network. I'm talking about i/...
(continues)

But where do you think that revenue that they generate goes? A large portion probably goes toward the billion dollars they spend every 90 days on their network. This is why they are adding customers at a much faster rate than any competitor. If the other carriers were smart they may start doing the same thing in hopes that they may provide their customers with the same quality of coverage and reliability.

tomvzw said:
But where do you think that revenue that they generate goes? A large portion probably goes toward the billion dollars they spend every 90 days on their network. This is why they are adding customers at a much faster rate than any competitor. If the other carriers were smart they may start doing the same thing in hopes that they may provide their customers with the same quality of coverage and reliability.

Mmm... I can't really go with that 'its ok to ripoff the consumer as long as you spend it on the network' line of reasoning. Its never ok to ream the consumer, especially in such an obvious and annoying way. And Verizon has an incentive to build its network no matter what- their great network...
(continues)

While I'm not an engineer, and do not work in the cellular industry, I believe that you may have overlooked something in Verizon's position.

I also own two Audiovox CDM9900s. They are great phones. No, I'm not happy that I can't hook them to my computer to perform transfers other than of a phonebook.

Let's consider the possibilities of allowing hundred of thousands of subscribers to do PC to phone data transfers. (The other millions probably couldn't give a rat's a$$ about anything other than making voice calls.) With all of the viruses, trojans, worms, spyware, malware, adware, etc that PCs are being contaminated with daily, I believe that Verizon is ALSO concerned with the strong probability of their system becoming infected with...
(continues)

verizon isn't locking out their Internet usage cause they are afraid of viruses. they are worried about revenue, and to suggest anything else is silly.

I've seen this line of logic here several times.
It doesn't wash.

First of all, hundreds of thousands of wireless phone subscribers are already allowed to transfer data between their phones and PCs. Verizon is a glaring exception. Do you suppose that GSM carriers like Cingular and T-Mobile who allow this simple functionality don't care about their networks? If viruses and such were the imminent menace you paint them to be, do you think they'd allow their phones to have unhampered connectivity?

Second, what Verizon does is not virus protection. They don't block all conectivity, they just charge excessively for the privilege of using the connectivity they do allow. Therefore, if there is such an imminent threat, they are almost a...
(continues)

I have no disagreement with your position regarding wanting to do your own phone-to-PC data transfers at no cost. I would love to do so as well.

However, as a computer user who wants my system to be protected against hacking, etc, I keep my antvirus software up to date. I keep my firewall up to date. I keep my operating system up to date. I depend on my Internet Service Provider to take similar measures to protect my account and their network from being compromised. I know that my employer has all kinds of similar filtering features employed on their network for security purposes. I'm not happy that some of those network security measures hamper my ability to send and receive certain email messages or visit many websites without dis...
(continues)

Why would you not expect Verizon Wireless to be concerned about the security of their network?

I would expect and hope that Verizon is concerned about securing their network. Please don't misunderstand. My point is that, clearly, there are methods of doing this that do not require them to charge me for using my phone's built in network capabilities as indicated by the fact that their competition somehow manages to protect themselves without this onerous feeing. Also, if data transfer is so frought, then how pray tell does charging and profiting from customer's transfering of data in any way protect their network?

In a free market with many choices I can't believe that anyone could call anyones rates extortion.
People who sign up with Verizon know the price plan before they sign on the dotted line.

Just because their competition offers a few more minutes for the same money doen't make Verizon crooked. With the amount of money Verizon invests in their network it would stand to reason that their service would be slightly more than, let's say T-Mobile or Cricket. They can only compete on price. Therefore they hammer on the price issue. Mini price = mini network and few features.
Verizon also swallows more of the price of the handset than most. Their handsets cost more than US Cellular's, T-Mobiles or Cingular's.

People for whom the price is th...
(continues)

SPCSVZWJeff said:
In a free market with many choices I can't believe that anyone could call anyones rates extortion.
People who sign up with Verizon know the price plan before they sign on the dotted line.

Just because their competition offers a few more minutes for the same money doen't make Verizon crooked. With the amount of money Verizon invests in their network it would stand to reason that their service would be slightly more than, let's say T-Mobile or Cricket. They can only compete on price. Therefore they hammer on the price issue. Mini price = mini network and few features.
Verizon also swallows more of the price of the handset than most. Their handsets cost more than US Cellular's, T-Mobiles or Cingular'

...
(continues)

That's all VZW seems to say though, sometimes. They've gotten arrogant.

I don't know why everyone seems to think Verizon arrogant. If you've got the best network in the country, and you're constantly putting more money into it than any other carrier...why wouldn't you constantly make a point of that? That's not arrogance. That's facts.

I'm not arguing that Verizon offers a good product and service, what I find interesting how you only seemed to quote that one little line, which is true. Verizon has staked is reputation largely on that it claims to have the biggest network. yadda, yadda, yadda...It's good to be proud of what you have, but not arrogant.

High prices, lack of phones (which again I like em-but it's a hot topic amongst consumers), purrposely hindering phones' capabilities such as bluetooth and data connectivity though manual transfer methods, from my understanding customer service is going downhill, and numerous other complaints.

ANY carrier will have it's complaints, I'm just simply pointing out a few that have been discussed in this forum.

I'm not ...
(continues)

I totally Agree with what you have to say and i am glad that i can feel that there are other people out there besides myself that feel the same way...There is nothing wrong with the service that Verizon brings...They have the "Best Coverage" in America...and that is fine but when it all comes down to it i dont care how many Letters or papers or commercials that you have that say that you are the best and have the best customer service and so on but the people who work for Verizon forget one thing...And that is the ability to talk...Let me say this...If you are a Car salesman and i go looking for a Ford F150 and u as the salesman tell me that your car is the best and all this and that and i tell you ok ill be back tommarrow with a decision......
(continues)

"42 Million or whatever Million customers they have" slowly decline.

At 1.5 million net add subscribers per quarter, I don't see that happening any time soon.

Common consumers just don't care, though.

You hit that nail directly on the head. People just want their phones to work...period. With Verizon that's more likely to happen than with any other network in North America.