Guess I won't be worrying about upgrading and missing out on an iPhone on T-mobile this year.
Found on 9-to-5 Mac
Showing posts with label Verizon. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Verizon. Show all posts
Thursday, January 13, 2011
America's FauxG Network Has Something to Say
Hey G's used to be gangstas. Ciara said it was for Girl. But telecoms, well G's are the future and they haz plenty geeez.
Trouble in Paradise
Well seems like there's trouble in paradise; only 3 days after Verizon announced they will be carrying the iPhone comes word they're also discontinuing their "New Every Two" plan. So if you thought you'd get that $199 iPhone at $100 discount - think again.
via Techland
Verizon iPad Imminent
Image via 9-to-5 Mac.
via Techtree - India
Monday, January 10, 2011
Oops, Verizon Tweets From Their iPhone
via Business Insider
Saturday, November 7, 2009
Rumor: iPhone on Verizon in 2010
So first, let's file this one under cloudy with a chance of pandering. AppleInsider reports a smaller bodied iPhone may be released by Verizon as early as Q3 2010.
The new Verizon iPhone is rumored to use a UMTS/CDMA hybrid radio that will allow it to run on Verizon's CDMA network AND still be able to use UMTS 3G networks - like AT&T. There is, as pictured, a rumored reduction in screen size from a 3.2" display to a smaller 2.8" display.
All this info comes from an overseas analyst, OTR Global, that is providing this info to AppleInsider; so I wouldn't get my hopes up just yet. Some of the possible bits of recent information that may lend some credibility to these rumors are the new early termination fees that are being imposed by Verizon for "advanced devices".
We'll keep an eye on this one nonetheless.
via AppleInsider
Wednesday, October 21, 2009
Net Neutrality - A Cheatsheet
It's gonna be a crazy week over at the FCC. October 22nd is the deadline for folks to voice their opinion to FCC and let them know why you'd like to keep the internet open for all. But with all the crazy talk on one particular cable network, it may not be clear what's at stake here.
First off: Net neutrality is NOT about restricting competition for your cable company, your phone company, satellite provider. Nope. Nah, not ever. How this net neutrality myth has gained steam lies really on the fact that this is a debate that's raged on longer than people considered the net to be cool.
Government regulation of the internet as Glenn "Asshat" Beck mentioned in his tirade is not about preventing a telecom from doing business; it's about making sure that said telecom continues to provide transparent services to their customers. Comcast regularly finds themselves (rightfully) as the target of many bloggers angst for their dubious regulatory practices in the name of protecting their business.
Clearly Beck must've not understand the concept of a "free market."
The proposed FCC regulations are designed to ensure that all ISPs - Comcast, Cablevision, Verizon, AT&T, et al will continue to provide internet service to their customers and provide clear, concise, no tiny print restrictions on their activities on said internet. Capping data downloads or uploads without expressly notifying their customers, restricting or crippling the use of specific websites would also be in violation of the proposed regulations.
How does this affect the regular guy/gal adventuring the interwebs? Well try to imagine an internet ran by AT&T (but you can just as easily insert your own ISP for the sake of fairness). In this internet, AT&T has an exclusive contractual agreement with Yahoo! for websearches; any AT&T customer that attempts to perform a search on Google or Bing will be (1) automatically re-directed to Yahoo! (2) be met with a 404 error (3) be in violation of their terms of service with AT&T and be subject to penalty.
Now imagine that your friend, coworker, client, family member is a Verizon customer with a Verizon email account. All emails sent from your AT&T account would be "lost" by Verizon in an effort to keep AT&T out of their "version" of the internet. You will not be amused to find out that you've lost a potential client because your ISP did not "approve" of their email address.
Clearly these are all doomsday scenarios but we must keep in mind that sometimes a little regulation is critical in maintaining order. Once upon a time there huge companies that owned raw materials, production, and finally point of sale. These were the "captains of industry," your blue-blood industrialists that brought forth the Industrial Age. They were also monopolizing giants that stifled innovation and oppressed their customers (and workers). And more importantly, needed regulation.
First off: Net neutrality is NOT about restricting competition for your cable company, your phone company, satellite provider. Nope. Nah, not ever. How this net neutrality myth has gained steam lies really on the fact that this is a debate that's raged on longer than people considered the net to be cool.
Government regulation of the internet as Glenn "Asshat" Beck mentioned in his tirade is not about preventing a telecom from doing business; it's about making sure that said telecom continues to provide transparent services to their customers. Comcast regularly finds themselves (rightfully) as the target of many bloggers angst for their dubious regulatory practices in the name of protecting their business.
Clearly Beck must've not understand the concept of a "free market."
The proposed FCC regulations are designed to ensure that all ISPs - Comcast, Cablevision, Verizon, AT&T, et al will continue to provide internet service to their customers and provide clear, concise, no tiny print restrictions on their activities on said internet. Capping data downloads or uploads without expressly notifying their customers, restricting or crippling the use of specific websites would also be in violation of the proposed regulations.
How does this affect the regular guy/gal adventuring the interwebs? Well try to imagine an internet ran by AT&T (but you can just as easily insert your own ISP for the sake of fairness). In this internet, AT&T has an exclusive contractual agreement with Yahoo! for websearches; any AT&T customer that attempts to perform a search on Google or Bing will be (1) automatically re-directed to Yahoo! (2) be met with a 404 error (3) be in violation of their terms of service with AT&T and be subject to penalty.
Now imagine that your friend, coworker, client, family member is a Verizon customer with a Verizon email account. All emails sent from your AT&T account would be "lost" by Verizon in an effort to keep AT&T out of their "version" of the internet. You will not be amused to find out that you've lost a potential client because your ISP did not "approve" of their email address.
Clearly these are all doomsday scenarios but we must keep in mind that sometimes a little regulation is critical in maintaining order. Once upon a time there huge companies that owned raw materials, production, and finally point of sale. These were the "captains of industry," your blue-blood industrialists that brought forth the Industrial Age. They were also monopolizing giants that stifled innovation and oppressed their customers (and workers). And more importantly, needed regulation.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)