Comments on: Verizon VS AT&T: Verizon’s ads are true and the truth hurts!

By: Mark Lederer

Mark Lederer — Sat, 19 Dec 2009 15:32:33 +0000

The Verizon adds are very misleading because the AT&T and Verizon “3G” are not the same service. Many of these ads show an alleged AT&T customer getting no service when in fact he would most likely be getting Edge service on par with Verizon’s 3G service. When they show that ad they should be required to state the LAT/LONG of the location. Quite often the ads show this non-service are to be in what appears to be a metropolitan location.. again this is very misleading. Many of these ads were probably shot in Studio City were AT&T has good coverage.

By: pinoytutorial

pinoytutorial — Sat, 21 Nov 2009 21:40:17 +0000

Thank you, as vague as it may sounds – Appleinsider used “mbits” instead of “mbytes / megabytes” to distinguish speeds. It will be unwise to alter their statement just for this article. We want our readers to see reports as it is. See their statement here.

Proper changes has been made.

By: Carlos

Carlos — Sat, 21 Nov 2009 17:38:34 +0000

On topic though, your review is spot on… I was completely baffled by AT&T’s claims. I mean honestly, why would they be upset that Verizon didn’t include oranges in an apple to apple comparison? They’ve really damaged their image by acting so aggressively to silence their, clearly superior, competitor. Now with the infrastructure in place, it’ll only be a short time before Verizon can make the claim to be the fastest, not just the fastest in 15% of America as AT&T does on every advertisement.

Perhaps AT&T should redirect their legal finances toward infrastructure development, and actually COMPETE with their competitors, not attempt to silence them.

By: Carlos

Carlos — Sat, 21 Nov 2009 17:29:33 +0000

Not to be a douchebag, but when discussing 2.5G-3G speeds we’re dealing with bits, not bytes. You mentioned that Verizon had a 1 “megabyte” advantage, when in fact you mean they have a 1 megabit advantage.

By: pinoytutorial

pinoytutorial — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 02:27:32 +0000

Thanks for the comments, see the updates and the "loser" video made by AT&T against Verizon. Enjoy!

By: AT&T VS VERIZON: Judges reject AT&T call to pull verizon ads | PINOYTUTORIAL TECHTORIAL

Fri, 20 Nov 2009 02:21:42 +0000

[...] tribal has spoken! and it appears this battle for the “survival of the verizon ads” already has a sweet spot in the eyes of the judges. Not saying this case is already over but [...]

By: Adam

Adam — Thu, 19 Nov 2009 23:06:05 +0000

I just love the Sprint ad at the end.

By: BAF

BAF — Thu, 19 Nov 2009 14:51:40 +0000

Liam: actually, from what I recall, Apple went to Verizon first with the iPhone idea, and Verizon turned them down because of all the strings attached. AT&T were the only ones who would become Apple’s bitch and let them run the show.

By: Liam

Liam — Thu, 19 Nov 2009 02:22:13 +0000

If I bought a smart phone (a 3G capable one,) I would want 3G coverage where ever I go, not 3G in main cities, then EDGE wherever else I am. I couldn’t use it, it would be too slow for the size of emails I have. I personally have an iPhone, and I like it, and have no problems with 3G speed and coverage (I’m in Canada on Rogers). But when I hit some EDGE spots, it’s hard to do anything, and ultimately defeats the purpose of a smart phone.

ATT has the iPhone audience, as well, and their 3G coverage is crap comparatively, an iPhone basically needs 3G to really work, it’s hard to use it on EDGE for what it is intended for. Why didn’t Verizon get it in the first place? Did Apple bid it to the companies, and ATT won? (They probably spent all their money bidding, that they could have used to actually make a good 3G network…)

By: James

James — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 09:58:53 +0000

Wonderful article, thanks for the links as well.

This should be fun to see how it all plays out.