Verizon wireless - Verizon deletes features

Author

Verizon deletes features

Bob F.

2007-04-26, 10:33 am

I just snapped my 2 brand new RAZR phones in half, brought them into the
Verizon store and read them the riot act in front of lots of customers about
how they deleted features from the phones that Motorola intended to be
there.

Then I went down to the Sprint store and bought two new RAZR phones.

Bob

J. H. Holliday

2007-04-26, 10:33 am

Pegleg

2007-04-26, 10:33 am

On Thu, 26 Apr 2007 08:55:06 -0400, "Bob F." <bob@N0ZPAMfurtaw.com>
wrote:

>I just snapped my 2 brand new RAZR phones in half, brought them into the
>Verizon store and read them the riot act in front of lots of customers about
>how they deleted features from the phones that Motorola intended to be
>there.

Your fault...you didn't read what the Verizon version of the phone would
do/wouldn't do before you bought it!

I know it sucks but it is common knowledge that Verizon has a reputation
for crippling phones!

Michael Wise

2007-04-26, 10:33 am

In article < 47adnSjW1dW1PK3bnZ2d
nUVZ_v-tnZ2d@comcast.com>,
"Bob F." <bob@N0ZPAMfurtaw.com> wrote:

> I just snapped my 2 brand new RAZR phones in half, brought them into the
> Verizon store and read them the riot act in front of lots of customers about
> how they deleted features from the phones that Motorola intended to be
> there.
>
> Then I went down to the Sprint store and bought two new RAZR phones.

Then you walked out of the Sprint store and stopped on the sidewalk
outside to call your friends and spread the good news...but you couldn't
get a cell signal.

--Mike

Agent_C

2007-04-26, 3:33 pm

Steven J. Sobol

2007-04-26, 3:33 pm

In article < 47adnSjW1dW1PK3bnZ2d
nUVZ_v-tnZ2d@comcast.com>, Bob F. wrote:
> I just snapped my 2 brand new RAZR phones in half, brought them into the
> Verizon store and read them the riot act in front of lots of customers about
> how they deleted features from the phones that Motorola intended to be
> there.
>
> Then I went down to the Sprint store and bought two new RAZR phones.

Hopefully you're going to be using them on Sprint's network, because
Verizon won't activate them... actually, there's a slight possibility
that they might, but even if they will (improbable), Sprint won't give
up the master subsidy lock so you can unlock the phone and use it on
VZ's network.

> Bob
>
>

--
Steve Sobol, Professional Geek ** Java/VB/VC/PHP/Perl ** Linux/*BSD/Windows
Victorville, California PGP:0xE3AE35ED

It's all fun and games until someone starts a bonfire in the living room.

Porgy Tirebiter

2007-04-26, 10:33 pm

"Bob F." <bob@N0ZPAMfurtaw.com> wrote in message
news:47adnSjW1dW1PK3
bnZ2dnUVZ_v-tnZ2d@comcast.com...
>I just snapped my 2 brand new RAZR phones in half, brought them into the
>Verizon store and read them the riot act in front of lots of customers
>about how they deleted features from the phones that Motorola intended to
>be there.
>
> Then I went down to the Sprint store and bought two new RAZR phones.
>
> Bob
>
This is why I bought the Samsung I-730 on Verizon. They cant cripple it, I
can do as I like with ringers/audio/video.I watch TV on it thru my
slingbox...yeah I know..a violation of my TOS......XXXX them! From what I
can tell Verizon sees it as data, cant tell what it is..so as long as I
don't exceed 5 gigs in a month I am OK. So what if they shut down my EVDO
service...all that will do is force me to SAVE $59 a month.In fact the web
browser is kinda crippled..its not very fast and wont display a lot of
pages...no big loss there.
I personally wont own a piece of shit "VCast" phone....not on a bet. I have
no desire to be billed 99¢ to a $1.99 for every little "feature" they want
to send me.
I was not impressed with the Razrs...felt the keyboard felt flimsy, and I
don't really need a paper-thin phone.My big/fat/heavy I-730 works OK.

Boron Elgar

2007-04-26, 10:33 pm

On Thu, 26 Apr 2007 07:45:58 -0700, Pegleg <Pegleg@usnavyret.mil>
wrote:

>On Thu, 26 Apr 2007 08:55:06 -0400, "Bob F." <bob@N0ZPAMfurtaw.com>
>wrote:
>
>
>Your fault...you didn't read what the Verizon version of the phone would
>do/wouldn't do before you bought it!
>
>I know it sucks but it is common knowledge that Verizon has a reputation
>for crippling phones!

They also have a reputation for staffing their stores with liars.

I have had several out and outright lies told to me in their stores,
either about phone capability or accessories or plans.

Boron

Larry

2007-04-26, 10:33 pm

"Bob F." <bob@N0ZPAMfurtaw.com> wrote in
news:47adnSjW1dW1PK3
bnZ2dnUVZ_v-tnZ2d@comcast.com:

> I just snapped my 2 brand new RAZR phones in half, brought them into
> the Verizon store and read them the riot act in front of lots of
> customers about how they deleted features from the phones that
> Motorola intended to be there.
>
> Then I went down to the Sprint store and bought two new RAZR phones.
>
> Bob
>
>

Good show, Bob!...(c; Doesn't that feel great?!

Larry on Alltel....
Great service, best coverage in the Southeast, no deleted features funny
business.
--

Pegleg

2007-04-26, 10:33 pm

On Thu, 26 Apr 2007 17:48:08 -0400, Boron Elgar
<boron_elgar@hotmail.com> wrote:

>They also have a reputation for staffing their stores with liars.
>
>I have had several out and outright lies told to me in their stores,
>either about phone capability or accessories or plans.

I'm not sure it is a case of outright lying as much as it is a case of
the employees not being trained/educated thoroughly. Most are not at
all familiar with the full capabilities of each phone they sell. Most
don't know what services are available on the "My Account" web site.

Much of this depends on the market area in which they work. I use to
live in the San Diego area and found the service reps I dealt with (in
person) were much more up-to-snuff with the hi-tech features of the
phones than those where I live now (Far northwest corner of Washington
State). This area is kind of like "lights are on but no one's home"
when it comes to technology.

Ultimately the individual you deal with face-to-face is a reflection on
how seriously the corporation takes customer service and Verizon has
long been known to have less than stellar customer service. What major
corporation has great CS? Very few because they know they can get away
with it.

TeddeLI

2007-04-26, 10:33 pm

Bob F. formulated the question :
> I just snapped my 2 brand new RAZR phones in half, brought them into the
> Verizon store and read them the riot act in front of lots of customers about
> how they deleted features from the phones that Motorola intended to be
> there.
>
> Then I went down to the Sprint store and bought two new RAZR phones.
>
> Bob

I don't like some of the features of my new car. I am going out
tomorrow and drive it into a tree.

Drumstick

2007-04-26, 10:33 pm

> > I just snapped my 2 brand new RAZR phones in half, brought them into the
>
> I don't like some of the features of my new car. I am going out
> tomorrow and drive it into a tree.
>
>
>
You know, I realize that VZW could do better with their customer service
but... Before his death, my brother was in sales (you name it he sold
it) and was GOOD at it. The major reason he was good was that he never
sold anything he didn't believe in and if he loast that belief he would
sell something else. The other reason he was good was that when he went
to a new "product" or job he did everything he could to learn about what
he was selling.

For example, at one point he worked in a retail computer store; so, he
learned every model they routinely carried and everything he could about
the features and components. He developed quite a "following" that way.
People would routinely come in and ask for him because he "knew his
stuff." He always answered questions and over time learned who the
"serious" customers were and took care of them. To do all that takes
time and effort.

So, the whole burden is not on VZW to train their staff but there is
some responsibility on the staff to be willing to learn and keep up with
what they are selling. After all, they CHOOSE to be there....even if
only until something better comes along.

Drum--

George

2007-04-27, 7:33 am

Bob F. wrote:
> I just snapped my 2 brand new RAZR phones in half, brought them into the
> Verizon store and read them the riot act in front of lots of customers about
> how they deleted features from the phones that Motorola intended to be
> there.
>
> Then I went down to the Sprint store and bought two new RAZR phones.
>
> Bob
>
>

Good story. You do know that you have 30 days to just return the product
if you don't like it?

Why make up a yahoo from the trailer park story?

Harry

2007-04-27, 10:33 am

On Thu, 26 Apr 2007 08:55:06 -0400, "Bob F." <bob@N0ZPAMfurtaw.com>
wrote:

>I just snapped my 2 brand new RAZR phones in half, brought them into the
>Verizon store and read them the riot act in front of lots of customers about
>how they deleted features from the phones that Motorola intended to be
>there.
>
>Then I went down to the Sprint store and bought two new RAZR phones.
>
>Bob
>

Just out of curiosity how much is this childish action going to cost
you?

Larry

2007-04-27, 10:33 am

TeddeLI <Spam@nospam.neat> wrote in
news:mn.d5067d7444e6362f.69402@nospam.neat:

> Bob F. formulated the question :
>
> I don't like some of the features of my new car. I am going out
> tomorrow and drive it into a tree.
>
>
>

Let's play this game a minute.....

You bought a new Honda from Valley Honda and Yugo. These Hondas come
with AC, radio, power windows, all the usual toys.....but.....Valley
Honda decides that none of their customers should be listening to AM
radio, have rear windows that open, remote control trunk lids or
automatic door locks....unless, of course, we sell these features back to
them after they buy the car.

Will Valley Honda be in business long, even if they are the only Honda
dealer within a hundred miles?

This is EXACTLY the game Verizon Wireless is playing with their
customers' cellphones.....

Why do people who would be outraged and tell Valley Honda where to put
their crippled cars....go out and buy a crippled cellphone from a
crippled company like Verizon? It's crazy!

Larry
--

Lee

2007-04-27, 12:33 pm

Larry wrote:

> Why do people who would be outraged and tell Valley Honda where to put
> their crippled cars....go out and buy a crippled cellphone from a
> crippled company like Verizon? It's crazy!

If that is crazy why do "we" buy cell phones? that need to be replaced
so often, it is crazy. New phone every two and cameras and all the
other toys like TV and internet that people seem to want and are willing
to pay for. I have one but it is for emergencies more or less. I force
myself to use some of the "free" Long Distance (420 minutes or 7 and 1/2
hours) per month so I don't feel like I wasted my money. I am on the
road quite a bit and that is why I did buy one. My last company AT@T
offered 90 minutes and I had time left over each month. My bill is
roughly $50 per month for the cell and approx $30 for the land line.

We are paying through the nose for convenience!

Lee

Pegleg

2007-04-27, 12:33 pm

On Fri, 27 Apr 2007 11:50:43 -0400, Lee <lbray5032@bellsouth.net> wrote:

>We are paying through the nose for convenience!
>
>Lee

Convenience costs whether it be cell phones/cable tv, cars or whatever.
No one "makes" you pay! You always have the option of suffering some in
convenience and not paying at all.

It is called free enterprise/capitalism! You have a choice, obviously
your choice is to whine!

Lee

2007-04-27, 3:33 pm

Pegleg wrote:
> On Fri, 27 Apr 2007 11:50:43 -0400, Lee <lbray5032@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>
>
[color=darkred]
>
> It is called free enterprise/capitalism! You have a choice, obviously
> your choice is to whine!

Hey Pegleg

That was not a whine more a statement of fact than anything else. There
are so many things that we consider necessary we could cut out and not
even miss them, like many of the so called necessities we think we need
to live! But as you stated we all make a choice and most of us pay for
the choices we make.

Lee

Steven J. Sobol

2007-04-27, 3:33 pm

In article <MPG. 209b20b43cef5bf29897
56@newsgroups.bellsouth.net>, Drumstick wrote:

> So, the whole burden is not on VZW to train their staff but there is
> some responsibility on the staff to be willing to learn and keep up with
> what they are selling. After all, they CHOOSE to be there....even if
> only until something better comes along.

I almost kinda sorta agree. VZW should be training extensively and
evaluating, and then re-evaluating, their employees to make sure they
do know their stuff. I do agree that the employees have an obligation
to at least try to learn, though.

--
Steve Sobol, Professional Geek ** Java/VB/VC/PHP/Perl ** Linux/*BSD/Windows
Victorville, California PGP:0xE3AE35ED

It's all fun and games until someone starts a bonfire in the living room.

Steven J. Sobol

2007-04-27, 3:33 pm

In article < Xns991F74E6E2F49noon
ehomecom@208.49.80.253>, Larry wrote:

> You bought a new Honda from Valley Honda and Yugo.

Yugo???

You're dating yourself, old man. :)

--
Steve Sobol, Professional Geek ** Java/VB/VC/PHP/Perl ** Linux/*BSD/Windows
Victorville, California PGP:0xE3AE35ED

It's all fun and games until someone starts a bonfire in the living room.

Notan

2007-04-27, 3:33 pm

Steven J. Sobol wrote:
> In article < Xns991F74E6E2F49noon
ehomecom@208.49.80.253>, Larry wrote:
>
>
> Yugo???
>
> You're dating yourself, old man. :)

At one time, I dated myself.

Very satisfying!

--
Notan

Evan Platt

2007-04-27, 3:33 pm

On Thu, 26 Apr 2007 15:25:57 GMT, Michael Wise <no@no.spam> wrote:

>Then you walked out of the Sprint store and stopped on the sidewalk
>outside to call your friends and spread the good news...but you couldn't
>get a cell signal.

And when you DO get a Sprint Signal, you're constantly saying "Can you
hear me now?"

Evan Platt

2007-04-27, 3:33 pm

On Fri, 27 Apr 2007 12:17:28 -0700, Evan Platt
<evan@theobvious.espphotography.com> wrote:

>And when you DO get a Sprint Signal, you're constantly saying "Can you
>hear me now?"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fxdTVaMjwD4

Evan Platt

2007-04-27, 3:33 pm

On Fri, 27 Apr 2007 15:27:19 +0000, Larry <noone@home.com> wrote:

>Let's play this game a minute.....
>
>You bought a new Honda from Valley Honda and Yugo. These Hondas come
>with AC, radio, power windows, all the usual toys.....but.....Valley
>Honda decides that none of their customers should be listening to AM
>radio, have rear windows that open, remote control trunk lids or
>automatic door locks....unless, of course, we sell these features back to
>them after they buy the car.
>
>Will Valley Honda be in business long, even if they are the only Honda
>dealer within a hundred miles?
>
>This is EXACTLY the game Verizon Wireless is playing with their
>customers' cellphones.....
>
>Why do people who would be outraged and tell Valley Honda where to put
>their crippled cars....go out and buy a crippled cellphone from a
>crippled company like Verizon? It's crazy!

No.. It's like "Let's buy a car that doesn't advertise it comes with
power windows and power door locks, but get pissed off that it doesnt.

Steven J. Sobol

2007-04-27, 3:33 pm

In article <r6udnR5_- IYb2q_bnZ2dneKdnZydn
Z2d@giganews.com>, Notan wrote:

> At one time, I dated myself.

Carbon dating?

*duck*

--
Steve Sobol, Professional Geek ** Java/VB/VC/PHP/Perl ** Linux/*BSD/Windows
Victorville, California PGP:0xE3AE35ED

It's all fun and games until someone starts a bonfire in the living room.

J. H. Holliday

2007-04-27, 10:33 pm

"Evan Platt" <evan@theobvious.espphotography.com> wrote in message
news:3dj433tc3r7grg0
ss019t4h0pio629944e@
4ax.com...
> On Fri, 27 Apr 2007 15:27:19 +0000, Larry <noone@home.com> wrote:
>
>
> No.. It's like "Let's buy a car that doesn't advertise it comes with
> power windows and power door locks, but get pissed off that it doesnt.

I think it would be more like getting that new car home only to find that
some of the standard features which the particular model comes with have
been removed by the dealer...

Notan

2007-04-27, 10:33 pm

Steven J. Sobol wrote:
> In article <r6udnR5_- IYb2q_bnZ2dneKdnZydn
Z2d@giganews.com>, Notan wrote:
>
>
> Carbon dating?
>
> *duck*

Now that hurt.

But not as much as when I split up!

*Duck* and *run*!

--
Notan

Larry

2007-04-27, 10:33 pm

Notan < notan@ddressthatcanb
espammed> wrote in news:r6udnR5_-
IYb2q_bnZ2dneKdnZydn
Z2d@giganews.com:

> At one time, I dated myself.
>
> Very satisfying!
>
> --
> Notan
>
>

Were you good?

Larry
--

Larry

2007-04-27, 10:33 pm

"J. H. Holliday" <doc@ok> wrote in
news:Uq2dnW6WvYv5wq_
bnZ2dnUVZ_qGjnZ2d@co
mcast.com:

>
> I think it would be more like getting that new car home only to find
> that some of the standard features which the particular model comes
> with have been removed by the dealer...
>
>
>

That's better....and more to the truth.

If everybody else's Honda Mega came with power windows and yours did, but
were disabled by the dealer....that'd be about right....(c;

How stupid....

Larry
--

Larry

2007-04-27, 10:33 pm

Evan Platt <evan@theobvious.espphotography.com> wrote in
news:28j433d65cfrbio
4og832bocd20shbc201@
4ax.com:

> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fxdTVaMjwD4

I always wondered who the little heroin addict was talking to...wearing
that stupid jacket when everyone else in the commercial was sweating in
shorts and tank tops.....hiding his needle tracks.

thanks....(c;

Larry
--

Scott

2007-04-27, 10:33 pm

Larry <noone@home.com> wrote in
news:Xns991FD8B60D9D
noonehomecom@208.49.80.253:

> "J. H. Holliday" <doc@ok> wrote in
> news:Uq2dnW6WvYv5wq_
bnZ2dnUVZ_qGjnZ2d@co
mcast.com:
>
>
> That's better....and more to the truth.
>
> If everybody else's Honda Mega came with power windows and yours did,
> but were disabled by the dealer....that'd be about right....(c;
>
> How stupid....
>
> Larry

No- the proper analogy would be to buy a car in California only to XXXXX
about the poorer gas mileage than one sold in North Carolina due to the
additional emission controls. Same model, same make, different
performance. And just like cell phones, the performance issue is one of
public record, meaning that those that whine about it didn't do thier
homework.

It's just further proof that American society has devolved into a bunch of
helpless children that need somebody to run around behind them wiping their
noses.

The Other Funk

2007-04-27, 10:33 pm

Finding the keyboard operational
Larry entered:

> "J. H. Holliday" <doc@ok> wrote in
> news:Uq2dnW6WvYv5wq_
bnZ2dnUVZ_qGjnZ2d@co
mcast.com:
>
>
> That's better....and more to the truth.
>
> If everybody else's Honda Mega came with power windows and yours did,
> but were disabled by the dealer....that'd be about right....(c;
>
> How stupid....
>
> Larry

Actually this whole car analogy is flawed.
What happens is Verizon goes to Motorola / Samsung / LG and says we want
these specs and features. Then Verizon offers it's phones as do Sprint and
AT&T. You the consumer mak the decision to sign up with Verizon and pick
from the list of phones the offer.
So for you to now complain that features you want aren't there is well, not
smart.
Bob

--
--
Coffee worth staying up for - NY Times
www.moondoggiecoffee.com

xPosTech

2007-04-28, 4:33 am

On 4/27/2007 8:20 PM, Larry wrote:
> Evan Platt <evan@theobvious.espphotography.com> wrote in
> news:28j433d65cfrbio
4og832bocd20shbc201@
4ax.com:
>
>
> I always wondered who the little heroin addict was talking to...wearing
> that stupid jacket when everyone else in the commercial was sweating in
> shorts and tank tops.....hiding his needle tracks.
>
> thanks....(c;
>
> Larry
Plonk

--
Ted
I wasn't born in Texas but
I got back here as soon as I could
(Don't forget to take out the trash)

No one can make you feel inferior without your consent,
but you'd be a fool to withhold that from your superiors.

bjm

2007-04-28, 10:33 pm

On Apr 26, 7:55 am, "Bob F." <b...@N0ZPAMfurtaw.com> wrote:
> I just snapped my 2 brand new RAZR phones in half, brought them into the
> Verizon store and read them the riot act in front of lots of customers about
> how they deleted features from the phones that Motorola intended to be
> there.
>
> Then I went down to the Sprint store and bought two new RAZR phones.
>
> Bob

Why didn't you sell them on ebay? Man, you must have some temper! Be
careful driving!!!!!

Boron Elgar

2007-04-28, 10:33 pm

On Thu, 26 Apr 2007 16:41:59 -0700, Pegleg <Pegleg@usnavyret.mil>
wrote:

>On Thu, 26 Apr 2007 17:48:08 -0400, Boron Elgar
><boron_elgar@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>I'm not sure it is a case of outright lying as much as it is a case of
>the employees not being trained/educated thoroughly. Most are not at
>all familiar with the full capabilities of each phone they sell. Most
>don't know what services are available on the "My Account" web site.

No, I am talking about outright lying.

Over the years the following has occurred - separate times

I was told that I had to buy my bluetooth earpiece from Versizon or it
wouldn't work with my phone.

I was told that I needed to buy all new accessories for my new phone
as none of the old ones I had could be used. This was insisted upon by
a salesperson and a manager, even after I showed them the car charger
I had was the same model number as that they were trying to sell me.

Not more than 3 hours ago, as I was exchanging 2 broken phones
(Motorola V325s - both died within a month of each other, both with
the same screen problems) I overheard the tech person lie to the woman
next to me who had brought in pretty new LG Strawberry which had
crapped out. The woman asked if she would be getting a brand new phone
as a replacement. The tech started talking about how long it would
take to get another phone.

Again the woman asked if she would be getting a brand new phone as a
replacement.

Again the tech refused to answer, this time by saying "What? New?"

..A third time the question was raised and this time the tech said.
"Well, it comes out of a box from the factory." The customer smiled,
assuming she'd get a new phone, when in fact, there was no question
she was getting a refurb.

None of this is lack of training. It is upselling and bullshitting.

I only go to the store when it is absolutely necessary. I keep 5
phones with Verizon as they are the carrier with the best coverage. It
isn't as if other carriers have better customer service, either. They
stink, too, but so does their coverage.

Boron

jgmankos@gmail.com

2007-04-30, 3:33 pm

>
> I don't like some of the features of my new car. I am going out
> tomorrow and drive it into a tree.

What if your new car had air conditioning...but the manufacturer of
the vehicle decided you didn't need it....

XS11E

2007-04-30, 10:33 pm

jgmankos@gmail.com wrote:

>
>
> What if your new car had air conditioning...but the manufacturer of
> the vehicle decided you didn't need it....

Irrelevent, Verizon shows features for each phone on it's website.

If you didn't research in advance or mod the phone to activate all the
features, well, that's your problem, isn't it?

clifto

2007-05-01, 4:33 am

Evan Platt wrote:
> On Fri, 27 Apr 2007 15:27:19 +0000, Larry <noone@home.com> wrote:
>
> No.. It's like "Let's buy a car that doesn't advertise it comes with
> power windows and power door locks, but get pissed off that it doesnt.

Seems to me it's more like "let's buy a car that doesn't advertise that it
comes without a steering wheel or transmission, and then complain that
it comes without a steering wheel or transmission."

--
Music hath charms to soothe the savage breast.
That's why stereo has two channels.

Todd Allcock

2007-05-01, 4:33 am

At 30 Apr 2007 16:30:17 -0700 XS11E wrote:

> Irrelevent, Verizon shows features for each phone on it's website.
>
> If you didn't research in advance or mod the phone to activate all the
> features, well, that's your problem, isn't it?

Yes and no. A "newbie" who isn't familiar with "crippling" might assume
you should be able to see the features of, say, a RAZR, on the Motorola
website, and not have to also cross-reverence the Verizon site to
determine what's been removed!

If Verizon wants to cripple a RAZR and call it a "VAZR" fine- caveat
emptor- but if a "RAZR" is supposed to, for example, act as a modem via
bluetooth according to the manufacturer (Motorola) and Verizon's version
has that feature removed, it's hardly the consumer's fault for "not doing
their homework" if they rely on the manufacturer's specs.

The Other Funk

2007-05-01, 7:33 am

Finding the keyboard operational
clifto entered:

> Evan Platt wrote:
>
> Seems to me it's more like "let's buy a car that doesn't advertise
> that it comes without a steering wheel or transmission, and then
> complain that
> it comes without a steering wheel or transmission."
Nope. You are equating articles of basic operation to accessories. It's a
cell phone for Pete's sake. Despite which features Verizon choses not to
support, it still makes and recieves calls.
Bob

--
--
Coffee worth staying up for - NY Times
www.moondoggiecoffee.com

The Other Funk

2007-05-01, 7:33 am

Finding the keyboard operational
Todd Allcock entered:

> At 30 Apr 2007 16:30:17 -0700 XS11E wrote:
>
>
> Yes and no. A "newbie" who isn't familiar with "crippling" might
> assume you should be able to see the features of, say, a RAZR, on the
> Motorola website, and not have to also cross-reverence the Verizon
> site to determine what's been removed!
>
> If Verizon wants to cripple a RAZR and call it a "VAZR" fine- caveat
> emptor- but if a "RAZR" is supposed to, for example, act as a modem
> via bluetooth according to the manufacturer (Motorola) and Verizon's
> version has that feature removed, it's hardly the consumer's fault
> for "not doing their homework" if they rely on the manufacturer's
> specs.

It's still cavet emptor because Motorola states very clearly that all
features may not be available on every carrier. See
http://www.store.motorola.com/mot/e...ctDetail

In particular
NOTE: Certain mobile phone features may not be available throughout the
entire network or their functionality may be limited. All features,
functionality and other product specifications are subject to change without
notice or obligation.

Also," Contact your wireless carrier about feature availability and
functionality."
Bob

--
--
Coffee worth staying up for - NY Times
www.moondoggiecoffee.com

Eye In The Sky

2007-05-01, 10:33 am

"clifto" <clifto@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:7b1jg4-r0n.ln1@remote.clifto.com...
> Evan Platt wrote:
[color=darkred]
>

> Seems to me it's more like "let's buy a car that doesn't advertise that it
> comes without a steering wheel or transmission, and then complain that
> it comes without a steering wheel or transmission."
>

The real issue is that the crippling yields a product that is counter to
people's expectations and experience. You wouldn't expect a car to be
missing the steering wheel and transmission, would you? Even if the fine
print in the sales contract said it was, it's still deceptive. And that's
the problem with what VZW is doing-- it's disingenuous.

Todd Allcock

2007-05-01, 10:33 am

At 01 May 2007 12:04:05 +0000 The Other Funk wrote:

> It's still cavet emptor because Motorola states very clearly that all
> features may not be available on every carrier. See
http://www.store.motorola.com/mot/e...d=
F363C5
CFEA2D8390DF58D3B18E
E75311.mot4? cmd=catProductDetail

> In particular
> NOTE: Certain mobile phone features may
> not be available throughout the entire network or their functionality
> may be limited.

To me, that sounds like I GET the feature but sometimes it won't work
depending on LOCATION, not carrier- like EVDO data which only works where
available.

> All features, functionality and other product specifications are
> subject to change without notice or obligation.

That's standard boilerplate- still a stretch.

> Also," Contact your wireless carrier about feature availability and
> functionality."

I'll give you that one, but I still don't think it's explicit enough, and
as far as I could see only applied to bluetooth- (you conveniently
trimmed that portion- the disclaimer in full is: "Certain Bluetooth
features including those listed may not be supported by all compatible
Bluetooth-enabled devices, and/or the functionality of such features may
be limited in certain devices, or by certain wireless carriers. Contact
your wireless carrier about feature availability and functionality."

That covers the bluetooth crippling anyway, but the disabling of file
transfer via cable, etc.

Look, I'm not saying Verizon doesn't have the right to dumb down phones
on their network, or that the information isn't out there, if you look
for it. I'm just saying it's not exactly obvious to the newer user.

Why any of you DEFEND this ridiculous practice, or actually blame the
consumer for not knowing about it amazes me!

The Other Funk

2007-05-01, 3:33 pm

Finding the keyboard operational
Todd Allcock entered:

> At 01 May 2007 12:04:05 +0000 The Other Funk wrote:
>
> http://www.store.motorola.com/mot/e...d=
F363C5
> CFEA2D8390DF58D3B18E
E75311.mot4? cmd=catProductDetail

>

Ambigious, I'll grant you. If could be read as "Certain mobile features
won't work anywhere on the network" Depends on which lawyer you talk to and
how much you are paying.
[color=darkred]
> To me, that sounds like I GET the feature but sometimes it won't work
> depending on LOCATION, not carrier- like EVDO data which only works
> where available.
>
>
> That's standard boilerplate- still a stretch.

Standard boilerplate is in there or a reason. Lawyer talk for "It's not our
fault."

>
> I'll give you that one, but I still don't think it's explicit enough,
> and as far as I could see only applied to bluetooth- (you conveniently
> trimmed that portion- the disclaimer in full is: "Certain Bluetooth
> features including those listed may not be supported by all compatible
> Bluetooth-enabled devices, and/or the functionality of such features
> may be limited in certain devices, or by certain wireless carriers.
> Contact your wireless carrier about feature availability and
> functionality."

I didn't mean to mislead anyone with the quote but you have a point. The
usual rant is about bluetooth functions and if I had been more careful, it
would have been more appropriate.

> That covers the bluetooth crippling anyway, but the disabling of file
> transfer via cable, etc.
>
> Look, I'm not saying Verizon doesn't have the right to dumb down
> phones on their network, or that the information isn't out there, if
> you look for it. I'm just saying it's not exactly obvious to the
> newer user.
>
> Why any of you DEFEND this ridiculous practice, or actually blame the
> consumer for not knowing about it amazes me!

Well I don't see it as a ridiculous practice. It is a business decision made
by Verizon to not support functions that other carriers do. One reason is
that by limiting certain high use functions such as modem traffic, more
voice traffic can be handled.
As for blaming the consumer... Well I knew where and what to look for but I
don't expect everyone to know that. In fact I expect a lot of confusion
comes from the"My friends phone does that. Why can't mine?" I DO expect the
verion sales people to know what works and what doesn't and I hope, but
don't believe, that 3rd party vendors would also know.
IIRC, there is a 15 day return policy without penalty fees. I do think that
ensuring that things you are paying for are something that you would test.
Bob

--
--
Coffee worth staying up for - NY Times
www.moondoggiecoffee.com

Larry

2007-05-01, 3:33 pm

"The Other Funk" <bobbie@moondoggie.com> wrote in
news:nWKZh.3834$%f7.2969@trndny03:

> Well I don't see it as a ridiculous practice. It is a business
> decision made by Verizon to not support functions that other carriers
> do. One reason is that by limiting certain high use functions such as
> modem traffic, more voice traffic can be handled.
>

Hmm....Am I the only one finding in this thread that "disingenuous", as
someone pointed out, seems to be worth defending the company over?

Am I the only one wondering WHY some are defending it?

Larry
--

The Other Funk

2007-05-01, 3:33 pm

Finding the keyboard operational
Larry entered:

> "The Other Funk" <bobbie@moondoggie.com> wrote in
> news:nWKZh.3834$%f7.2969@trndny03:
>
>
> Hmm....Am I the only one finding in this thread that "disingenuous",
> as someone pointed out, seems to be worth defending the company over?
>
> Am I the only one wondering WHY some are defending it?
>
> Larry

If you are refering to me, rest assured that I am not defending Verizon. Far
from it. I am trying to point out what their practices are so that no one
gets surprised.
I don't see the non-support of features as ridiculous but as a hard cold
dollars and cents decision that Verizon made. If any consumer wants the
features that Verizon doesn't support I hope that they have another carrier
that they can get service from with the features they want. Sadly, they
might find that there is a trade off in coverage that makes Verizon the
better choice in their area.
Bob
--
--
Coffee worth staying up for - NY Times
www.moondoggiecoffee.com

XS11E

2007-05-01, 3:33 pm

Larry <noone@home.com> wrote:

> Hmm....Am I the only one finding in this thread that
> "disingenuous", as someone pointed out, seems to be worth
> defending the company over?
>
> Am I the only one wondering WHY some are defending it?

Sorry, Larry, you misunderstand. I'm not defending the company, I'm
commenting on a bunch of immature whiners who didn't do their homework.

Please do continue your whining if it makes you feel better.

Morons!

Todd Allcock

2007-05-01, 3:33 pm

At 01 May 2007 17:38:27 +0000 The Other Funk wrote:

> Ambigious, I'll grant you. If could be read as "Certain mobile features
> won't work anywhere on the network" Depends on which lawyer you talk to
and how much you are paying.

Agreed.

>
> Standard boilerplate is in there or a reason. Lawyer talk for "It's not
> our fault."

Agreed again. I'm not in any way suggesting Verizon is doing anything
illegal.

> I didn't mean to mislead anyone with the quote but you have a point.
The usual rant is about bluetooth functions and if I had been more careful,
it would have been more appropriate.

True- bluetooth crippling is the major complaint.

> Well I don't see it as a ridiculous practice. It is a business decision
> made by Verizon to not support functions that other carriers do. One
> reason is that by limiting certain high use functions such as modem
> traffic, more voice traffic can be handled.

Agreed- and some might make sense- i.e. disallowing phone-as-modem use to
prevent tethering a laptop on the network without paying the
"appropriate" rate. It would be much harder to defend crippling a
feature that lets you transfer camera pictures to your PC without sending
them to yourself via Verizon's network. That's just a money grab, plain
and simple, and while perfectly legal, is crummy for a company like
Verizon.

> As for blaming the consumer... Well I knew where and what to look for
> but I don't expect everyone to know that. In fact I expect a lot of
> confusion comes from the"My friends phone does that. Why can't mine?"

Fair enough. What frosts me, I guess, is comparing the situation to the
GSM world- GSM carriers are equally guilty of crippling handets, but they
don't restrict what handset I can use- if a T-Mobile RAZR doesn't allow
bluetooth transfer of pictures to my PC, I can spend $200 for an unlocked
un-carrier customized RAZR that will.

Verizon gets their cake and gets to eat it too- they restrict what models
of handset you can use to the few they carry, and then can cripple each
an every one any way they see fit.

Again, nothing illegal about it- it just a constant reminder that "It's
The Network" is THEIR network- not yours! ;-)

> I DO expect the verion sales people to know what works and what doesn't
> and I hope, but don't believe, that 3rd party vendors would also know.

True, but they should if they're selling the product.

> IIRC, there is a 15 day return policy without penalty fees. I do think
> that ensuring that things you are paying for are something that you
> would test.

Agreed, but unless you switch carriers, you might not find ANY handset
that supports the features you want.

Again, not illegal, just sad.
[This discussion just reminded me of when I was at a children's museum
with my kids a month or two ago and a woman ther was taking snapshots of
her kids climbing on a fire-engine with her RAZR (a Sprint-branded one,
IIRC.) She looked over at me and said "I don't know why I bother- I've
never been able to get a picture OUT of this phone yet!"]

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

Larry

2007-05-01, 10:33 pm

"The Other Funk" <bobbie@moondoggie.com> wrote in
news:05MZh.3428$YQ1.1289@trndny02:

> I don't see the non-support of features as ridiculous but as a hard
> cold dollars and cents decision that Verizon made. If any consumer
> wants the features that Verizon doesn't support I hope that they have
> another carrier that they can get service from with the features they
> want. Sadly, they might find that there is a trade off in coverage
> that makes Verizon the better choice in their area.
>

"non support"? What's that mean in Newspeak? If you are referring to
the operational menu choices like "Move" or "Copy" or "Change Storage
Device" or "Apply As Ringtone" that Motorola normally supplies with every
phone and Verizon turns off to force their customers to pay for something
that is, normally, free to use to the rest of us.....I don't call that
"support". I call it "Denial of Service" or "Denial of Access" to
STANDARD features the phone model, like my new E815, were designed with.

No, I think FTC should force them to list STANDARD features in every
product they sell that have been REMOVED to promote profits. Something
like:

"This phone has has these standard features removed by Verizon Wireless:

-- The ability to copy pictures from internal memory to memory cards.
-- The ability to copy MP3 files from memory cards to internal memory.
-- The ability to make MP3 files copied from memory cards to internal
memory into ringtones.
-- The ability to take pictures straight to memory cards that any
computer can read without sending them.
-- The ability to play MP3 files directly from the computer on memory
cards.

These features have been deleted by Verizon Wireless as a business
decision."

Let's force them to list them in the SAME typeface and font as the damned
advertising on every webpage each particular phone is advertised on, and
on every printed sheet selling them to consumers.

It's called "Fair Business Practice" and the Federal Trade Commission is
tasked with its implementation and enforcement.

Just not mentioning that the new Ford Focus doesn't include window
winders and a transmission isn't quite enough. Anything all the other
cars come with, like a transmission and windows that roll down, should be
LISTED as not available on this model.

"This car does not come with tires or wheels, which are available at
additional cost." - The ad would state on the FRONT of it.

Larry
--

Larry

2007-05-01, 10:33 pm

XS11E <xs11eNO@SPAMyahoo.com> wrote in news:Xns99237A42BCA6
xs11eyahoocom@
69.28.173.184:

> Sorry, Larry, you misunderstand. I'm not defending the company, I'm
> commenting on a bunch of immature whiners who didn't do their homework.
>
> Please do continue your whining if it makes you feel better.
>
> Morons!
>
>
>

See my other reply. Humans expect all cars to come with certain
"standard features", like tires, wheels, engine, transmission, windows
that roll up and down, headlights, taillights, seats, bumpers, etc. They
shouldn't have to search through company bullshit to find that no, this
model doesn't come with a transmissions, rear seats or windshield wipers.

By the same token, they shouldn't have to expect that if a phone comes
with a camera, then they are not allowed to offload the pictures from
that camera without paying 25c/picture to transfer that picture to the
computer the phone is sitting next to. The phone should come with a
CABLE to copy them, like every OTHER digital camera they can buy. If the
phone comes with an MP3 player, they should expect to be able to LOAD
that MP3 player from the computer it's sitting next to.....

......all without "doing their homework to find out if these devices have
been disabled unless they pay-per-view".

Bullshit....

Larry
--

Larry

2007-05-01, 10:33 pm

Todd Allcock < elecconnec@AmericaOn
Line.com> wrote in news:46379014$0
$16397$88260bb3@free
.teranews.com:

> Agreed- and some might make sense- i.e. disallowing phone-as-modem use
to
> prevent tethering a laptop on the network without paying the
> "appropriate" rate. It would be much harder to defend crippling a
> feature that lets you transfer camera pictures to your PC without
sending
> them to yourself via Verizon's network. That's just a money grab,
plain

> and simple, and while perfectly legal, is crummy for a company like
> Verizon.
>
>

I'm not sure that couldn't be tested under my favorite 15USC50 2304(a)
(4):

"(4) if the product (or a component part thereof) contains a defect or
malfunction after a reasonable number of attempts by the warrantor to
remedy defects or malfunctions in such product, such warrantor must
permit the consumer to elect either a refund for, or replacement without
charge of, such product or part (as the case may be). The Commission may
by rule specify for purposes of this paragraph, what constitutes a
reasonable number of attempts to remedy particular kinds of defects or
malfunctions under different circumstances. If the warrantor replaces a
component part of a consumer product, such replacement shall include
installing the part in the product without charge."

Defect - "My phone won't copy pictures to my computer."

"permit the consumer to elect either a refund for, or replacement without
charge of, such product or part"

You have 30 days or 3 attempts to get my phone to copy the pictures to my
computer, just like Motorola says it should on:
(quote Motorola's webpage here).

Obviously, the phone is defective as I can't get the pictures on my
computer by moving the memory card or by a cable. It's under WARRANTY,
so IS covered by Magnusson-Moss (15USC50 2300 et.al.)

Fix it or refund....not much of a no-brainer at all, is it?

Larry
--
Any lawyers out there willing to test it reading this?

I bet I'd know what a JURY would say....(c;

XS11E

2007-05-01, 10:33 pm

Larry <noone@home.com> wrote:

> XS11E <xs11eNO@SPAMyahoo.com> wrote in
> news:Xns99237A42BCA6
xs11eyahoocom@ 69.28.173.184:
>

<FUD snipped>
[color=darkred]
> Bullshit....

Right, bullshit.

The Other Funk

2007-05-01, 10:33 pm

Finding the keyboard operational
Larry entered:

> Todd Allcock < elecconnec@AmericaOn
Line.com> wrote in news:46379014$0
> $16397$88260bb3@free
.teranews.com:
>
>
> I'm not sure that couldn't be tested under my favorite 15USC50 2304(a)
> (4):
>
> Larry

I'm sure that the laughing will go on for a long time if you try.
There is no "defect" and for the record, nothing has been "removed" because
it was never there. Verizon contracts with Motorola to provide a phone to
their specs. You don't like the specs, go elsewhere.
I do know that in about 40 minutes I am going to regret trying to reason
with Larry but I just couldn't help myself.
Bob
--
--
Coffee worth staying up for - NY Times
www.moondoggiecoffee.com

TeddeLI

2007-05-01, 10:33 pm

Larry formulated on Tuesday :
> "The Other Funk" <bobbie@moondoggie.com> wrote in
> news:nWKZh.3834$%f7.2969@trndny03:
>
>
> Hmm....Am I the only one finding in this thread that "disingenuous", as
> someone pointed out, seems to be worth defending the company over?
>
> Am I the only one wondering WHY some are defending it?
>
> Larry

ER, AH, Larry this is a Verizon newsgroup. Wouldn't you expect to find
defenders here? Since you are not a Verizon user any more Verizon
should be of little interest to you. I would expect you to monitor
groups you have more association with and defend them if necessary.

All I know is I pick up the phone, I have coverage, and at a price I'm
willing to pay. I don't lie awake all night pissed off at the other
features. If I did, I would switch.

TeddeLI

2007-05-01, 10:33 pm

The Other Funk used his keyboard to write :
> Finding the keyboard operational
> Larry entered:
>
>
> I'm sure that the laughing will go on for a long time if you try.
> There is no "defect" and for the record, nothing has been "removed" because
> it was never there. Verizon contracts with Motorola to provide a phone to
> their specs. You don't like the specs, go elsewhere.
> I do know that in about 40 minutes I am going to regret trying to reason
> with Larry but I just couldn't help myself.
> Bob
> --
> --
> Coffee worth staying up for - NY Times
> www.moondoggiecoffee.com

Why would it take you 40 minutes to regret arguing with Larry? You
should regret it instantly. ;-)

Larry

2007-05-01, 10:33 pm

TeddeLI <Spam@nospam.neat> wrote in news:mn.0cc17d758affdd56.69402
@nospam.neat:

> ER, AH, Larry this is a Verizon newsgroup. Wouldn't you expect to find
> defenders here? Since you are not a Verizon user any more Verizon
> should be of little interest to you. I would expect you to monitor
> groups you have more association with and defend them if necessary.
>
>

Why would any customer of any corporation defend that corporation?

What purpose does it serve to the customer?

It's a fascinating phenomenon, brand loyalty. There must be some
fascinating psychology behind it. (brainwashing?)

Larry
--

XS11E

2007-05-01, 10:33 pm

Larry <noone@home.com> wrote:

> Why would any customer of any corporation defend that corporation?

You still don't understand, do you, Larry?

We're NOT "defending that corporation", we're saying you're an
imbecile.

OK? Got it now?

Now go live in my killfile.

Todd Allcock

2007-05-01, 10:33 pm

At 01 May 2007 21:23:37 +0000 Larry wrote:

> I'm not sure that couldn't be tested under my favorite 15USC50 2304(a)
> (4):
>
> "(4) if the product (or a component part thereof) contains a defect or
> malfunction after a reasonable number of attempts by the warrantor to
> remedy defects or malfunctions in such product, such warrantor must
> permit the consumer to elect either a refund for, or replacement
without
> charge of, such product or part (as the case may be).
>
> Defect - "My phone won't copy pictures to my computer."

And under what broad definition of "phone" would that be considered a
defect? Even under the definition of "camera" that's not necessarily a
defect- my old Poloroid Land Camera can't transfer images to my PC via USB.
(For those under 50 years old, it's an ancient instant film camera.)

In fact, one could very easily argue that the "natural" way for a phone
to transfer information- even pictures- would be... (you guessed it...)
over the telephone! (Which is how the cripplephones do it.)

Certainly you know I'm not defending crippling, but even I think that
argument is pretty weak! ;-)

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

Larry

2007-05-02, 4:33 am

Todd Allcock < elecconnec@AmericaOn
Line.com> wrote in
news:4637ef33$0$5951
$88260bb3@free.teranews.com:

> And under what broad definition of "phone" would that be considered a
> defect? Even under the definition of "camera" that's not necessarily
> a defect- my old Poloroid Land Camera can't transfer images to my PC
> via USB.
> (For those under 50 years old, it's an ancient instant film camera.)
>
>

Oops...better go read the adverts, again, closer. The ads say the phone
has a "Digital Camera", a modern device the public has grown to expect
connects to a COMPUTER to store, display and print its images. It was
never advertised as a Polaroid Land Camera.....well, yet.

It was also advertised as an MP3 or digital music player, another modern
device the public has grown to expect connects to a COMPUTER to send and
receive files to and from it for the player to play....

Is that a good point, Your Honor? Madam Jury Foreman?

Larry
--
Hmm...we're gonna have to look hard to find 12 jurors who remember
Polaroid Land Cameras....

clifto

2007-05-02, 4:33 am

Eye In The Sky wrote:
> "clifto" <clifto@gmail.com> wrote...
>
>
> The real issue is that the crippling yields a product that is counter to
> people's expectations and experience. You wouldn't expect a car to be
> missing the steering wheel and transmission, would you?

I thought I said that.

--
Music hath charms to soothe the savage breast.
That's why stereo has two channels.

clifto

2007-05-02, 4:33 am

Organization: Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy
User-Agent: KNode/0.10.4
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
Lines: 27
NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.15.127.46
X-Trace: sv3- aqXqGUnoywaMLa4KDdpH
DR3P9D/ RQnG8gBg4lmOMGdBpiY0
5jo3wIvCWxLJsnvktO/ BCOTUZ1Y2Q76P!OD2sWu
iz0K8liXTBeYjJEgzQfO
GYYO0cwk6ftXbrFziqLN
yD91n/0bA5m4PqknBxT/ 7KISeVlZRM!TXGiM7TGz
4r7
X-Complaints-To: abuse@comcast.net
X-DMCA-Complaints-To: dmca@comcast.net
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.34
Xref: number1.nntp.dca.giganews.com alt.cellular.verizon:219251

The Other Funk wrote:
> clifto entered:
> Nope. You are equating articles of basic operation to accessories. It's a
> cell phone for Pete's sake. Despite which features Verizon choses not to
> support, it still makes and recieves calls.

Fine. Then make it a windshield and a dashboard. Then each story has the
purchaser buying an item which doesn't have features the item could
reasonably be expected to have.

--
Music hath charms to soothe the savage breast.
That's why stereo has two channels.

The Other Funk

2007-05-02, 7:33 am

Finding the keyboard operational
TeddeLI entered:

> The Other Funk used his keyboard to write :
>
> Why would it take you 40 minutes to regret arguing with Larry? You
> should regret it instantly. ;-)

I figured it would take him that long to respond.
Bpb
--
--
Coffee worth staying up for - NY Times
www.moondoggiecoffee.com

George

2007-05-02, 10:33 am

Todd Allcock wrote:
> At 01 May 2007 21:23:37 +0000 Larry wrote:
>
> without
>
>
> And under what broad definition of "phone" would that be considered a
> defect? Even under the definition of "camera" that's not necessarily a
> defect- my old Poloroid Land Camera can't transfer images to my PC via USB.
> (For those under 50 years old, it's an ancient instant film camera.)
>
> In fact, one could very easily argue that the "natural" way for a phone
> to transfer information- even pictures- would be... (you guessed it...)
> over the telephone! (Which is how the cripplephones do it.)
>

Actually a good argument. Many people don't want to know or care about
transfers or filesystems and just want to be able to take a picture of
something and send it to someone else.

>
> Certainly you know I'm not defending crippling, but even I think that
> argument is pretty weak! ;-)
>
>
>

TeddeLI

2007-05-02, 10:33 pm

Larry formulated on Tuesday :
> TeddeLI <Spam@nospam.neat> wrote in news:mn.0cc17d758affdd56.69402
> @nospam.neat:
>
>
> Why would any customer of any corporation defend that corporation?
>
> What purpose does it serve to the customer?
>
> It's a fascinating phenomenon, brand loyalty. There must be some
> fascinating psychology behind it. (brainwashing?)
>
> Larry

IMHO most people are not defending the corporation here. They are just
trying to point out that they don't really care about the the deleted
features.

People mostly care about the coverage they get. If ringtones and file
transfer were that important a lot of people would switch to a carrier
that has them. Since Verizon's churn rate is very low that has not
happened.

I don't think its brainwashing. My theory is that there are full sized
peapod like plants placed in homes at night. When you are sleeping you
are replaced with with the beings in the pods. Your body has been
snatched. It is only then you defend corporations. Those old enough to
understand my reference will remember that Kevin McCarthy escaped the
pods.

Now if you really want to attack a corporation how about switching to
EXXON MOBILE. I could get into that.

Todd Allcock

2007-05-03, 4:33 am

At 02 May 2007 04:38:25 +0000 Larry wrote:

> Oops...better go read the adverts, again, closer. The ads say the
phone

> has a "Digital Camera", a modern device the public has grown to expect
> connects to a COMPUTER to store, display and print its images. It was
> never advertised as a Polaroid Land Camera.....well, yet.

It connects just fine to your PC... via Verizon's data $ervice$! ;-)

> It was also advertised as an MP3 or digital music player, another
modern
> device the public has grown to expect connects to a COMPUTER to send
and
> receive files to and from it for the player to play....
>
> Is that a good point, Your Honor? Madam Jury Foreman?

Hey, I'm on your side, but in their defense, Verizon already offers a 30-
day return policy. That's plenty of time to discover a phone's "defects."

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

XS11E

2007-05-03, 4:33 am

Todd Allcock < elecconnec@AmericaOn
Line.com> wrote:

> At 02 May 2007 04:38:25 +0000 Larry wrote:
>
>
> It connects just fine to your PC... via Verizon's data $ervice$!
> ;-)

It also connects just fine to your PC... via a usb cable. If your
phone uses a data card you can save pictures there, if not Motorola
Phone Tools and slight seem mod are required.

See above.[color=darkred]
>
> Hey, I'm on your side, but in their defense, Verizon already
> offers a 30- day return policy. That's plenty of time to discover
> a phone's "defects."

and correct them. It took me about 30 minutes to make my phone connect
with the USB cable.

Nick Danger

2007-05-04, 10:33 pm

"Boron Elgar" <boron_elgar@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:4ko733dfbb1pitv
9lbi5fq6d416nu71fd6@
4ax.com...
> Over the years the following has occurred - separate times
>
> I was told that I had to buy my bluetooth earpiece from Versizon or it
> wouldn't work with my phone.

From what friends have told me, it seems like just about everyone who talks
to a salesdroid when buying a BT headset - regardless of where they go to
shop - gets a story about how only certain headsets work with certain
phones. It does appear to be true that the technology needs to mature a
little bit more, but I'm not aware of any case where a particular
phone/headset combination are outright incompatible. Still the legend lives
on. It is an indication of rather shabby marketing, but it's not unique to
Verizon.

Todd Allcock

2007-05-04, 10:33 pm

At 04 May 2007 17:33:48 -0400 Nick Danger wrote:

> From what friends have told me, it seems like just about everyone who
talks

> to a salesdroid when buying a BT headset - regardless of where they go
to
> shop - gets a story about how only certain headsets work with certain
> phones. It does appear to be true that the technology needs to mature a
> little bit more, but I'm not aware of any case where a particular
> phone/headset combination are outright incompatible.

I guess it depends how you define "incompatible." I have three BT
headsets and two BT phones. Some features of my headsets work on one
phone but not the other (Jabra's "hold the talk button to redial" works
on my Nokia but not my HTC. A no-name headset only initiates a voice-
dial call with it's talk button once- you need to reboot the phone to
ever get voicedial to work again, etc.)

> Still the legend lives
> on. It is an indication of rather shabby marketing, but it's not unique
to
> Verizon.

I don't know- if Verizon's people are honest- i.e. "some headsets work
flawlessly, some have issues, but we've tested our models x, y and z and
they're guaranteed to work..." rather than, say, "only the headsets we
sell work, any headset you but elsewhere probably won't" then I don't
have a problem with that advice, even if it's self-serving.

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

clifto

2007-05-04, 10:33 pm

Nick Danger wrote:
> From what friends have told me, it seems like just about everyone who talks
> to a salesdroid when buying a BT headset - regardless of where they go to
> shop - gets a story about how only certain headsets work with certain
> phones.

In searching for headsets, I found a lot of stories about certain models
of Treo (seems like the 650 came up often) not working nicely with a
whole passel of BT headsets, to the point of finding the occasional Treo
user rejoicing at finding a headset that did work.

--
Postulate a God who's so smart He designed things we won't discover for the
next ten years, but who's so incredibly stupid He couldn't think up the
theory of evolution. Duhhhhhhhh. "Damn, Darwin, what a great idea!"

Larry

2007-05-05, 4:33 am

Todd Allcock < elecconnec@AmericaOn
Line.com> wrote in news:463baa11$0
$16299$88260bb3@free
.teranews.com:

> I don't know- if Verizon's people are honest- i.e. "some headsets work
> flawlessly, some have issues, but we've tested our models x, y and z
and
> they're guaranteed to work..." rather than, say, "only the headsets we
> sell work, any headset you but elsewhere probably won't" then I don't
> have a problem with that advice, even if it's self-serving.
>
>

A friend complained his BT headsets (3) wouldn't work with his phone....

I checked and it was paired with the phone he handed me, but it just
wouldn't work right...real strange. They all did it, not just the one!

Then, I noticed the headset was STILL paired (light flashing as paired)
when the damned phone in my hand was turn OFF! Hmm...clicked the headset
and told whatever it was to call MY cellphone number. When my phone
rang, HIS WIFE'S CELL NAME/NUMBER SHOWED IN MY DISPLAY! All 3 of his
headsets were paired to BOTH PHONES!

That AIN'T GONNA WORK, SPORT!

As long as he wasn't with his wife and her phone, the damned headset
worked great....(c; When he was with her....they had TWO headsets paired
to BOTH PHONES AT ONCE!......"S&it Happens"....(c;

Larry
--
This spammer called my cellphone:
First American Payment
10101 E Arapaho Rd
Richardson, TX 75081
972-301-3766
They were nasty when I politely said I wasn't interested....(c;

Todd Allcock

2007-05-05, 10:33 am

At 05 May 2007 03:54:50 +0000 Larry wrote:

> This spammer called my cellphone:
> First American Payment
> 10101 E Arapaho Rd
> Richardson, TX 75081
> 972-301-3766
> They were nasty when I politely said I wasn't interested....(c;

I don't believe this story for one second...

Oh, I believe the spammer called your cellphone, but I don't believe you
were polite! ;-)

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

sobe

2007-05-05, 10:33 pm

8O...he said bullshit!!!!
wow....sorry to bud in but this is funny!

Larry wrote:
>XS11E <xs11eNO@SPAMyahoo.com> wrote in news:Xns99237A42BCA6
xs11eyahoocom@
>69.28.173.184:
>
>
>See my other reply. Humans expect all cars to come with certain
>"standard features", like tires, wheels, engine, transmission, windows
>that roll up and down, headlights, taillights, seats, bumpers, etc. They
>shouldn't have to search through company bullshit to find that no, this
>model doesn't come with a transmissions, rear seats or windshield wipers.
>
>By the same token, they shouldn't have to expect that if a phone comes
>with a camera, then they are not allowed to offload the pictures from
>that camera without paying 25c/picture to transfer that picture to the
>computer the phone is sitting next to. The phone should come with a
>CABLE to copy them, like every OTHER digital camera they can buy. If the
>phone comes with an MP3 player, they should expect to be able to LOAD
>that MP3 player from the computer it's sitting next to.....
>
>.....all without "doing their homework to find out if these devices have
>been disabled unless they pay-per-view".
>
>Bullshit....
>
>Larry
>--

Larry

2007-05-06, 10:33 pm

Todd Allcock < elecconnec@AmericaOn
Line.com> wrote in news:463c9472$0
$16274$88260bb3@free
.teranews.com:

> Oh, I believe the spammer called your cellphone, but I don't believe
you
> were polite! ;-)
>

(she starts reading her sales script).....which included a warning that
her company's application had already been mailed to my business PO box
address.

"Excuse me, I'm not interested, I don't take credit cards for my service
calls. Can you remove me from all your databases and cold call lists?",
I asked her.

In an incredulous voice, she said, "You don't take credit cards?! You
should (and started reading from another script I didn't want to hear)...

"No, no. Listen, you've cold called my cellphone number, which is on the
DO NOT CALL LIST. I just want you to remove it all from the databases
and never call me again.", I interrupted her.

"I don't care about that. You need to check out our credit card offer
which will arrive in your mailbox in the next couple of days!", she says
in an abusive, raised voice which pissed me off enough to post their
information I got from switchboard.com from my caller ID they forgot to
block. I did call back, of course it's always busy signals....(c;

I was as polite as I could be. Are you happier now, Todd?

Larry
--
This spammer called my cellphone:
First American Payment
10101 E Arapaho Rd
Richardson, TX 75081
972-301-3766
They were nasty when I politely said I wasn't interested....(c;

Todd Allcock

2007-05-06, 10:33 pm

At 06 May 2007 20:42:07 +0000 Larry wrote:

> I was as polite as I could be. Are you happier now, Todd?

You're a better man than I, sir! My cellphone number is my old business
landline ported to T-Mobile. I get a couple of solicitation calls a day
and am far less patient with them than you obviously are!

Larry

2007-05-07, 4:33 am

Todd Allcock < elecconnec@AmericaOn
Line.com> wrote in news:f1lve5$lel$1
@aioe.org:

> You're a better man than I, sir! My cellphone number is my old
business
> landline ported to T-Mobile. I get a couple of solicitation calls a
day
> and am far less patient with them than you obviously are!
>

One of my sadistic little pleasures in life, with so many minutes going
unused on Alltel every month, is trying to see how long I can string
along a spammer, if I'm not working or have something interesting going
on when they call. I've also asked them to call back at X hours and I'll
talk to them, then....keeping the sales hope alive...(c;

Once they have my attention, in free time, I will listen to the whole
program, then start asking the stupidest questions about it, getting them
to repeat as much as I can without them becoming suspicious. I'm one of
the dumbest blondes you know..(c;

Towards the end, when their heart rate and frustration level becomes too
dangerous for their own good, I'll say something like, "Hmm...I'm going
to have to think about this. Can I call you back?" Of course, you can't
call anyone back in a boiler room or get any kind of callback number to
publish to the spambots. But, I can try, right?..(c;

Now having consumed about a manhour of the company's profit, a fitting
individual punishment for calling my DO NOT CALL LIST cellular phone
number, a Federal offence, they, usually, dump me. I've even gotten a
couple to scream!...(c;

Pray I don't send your website to some IT guys I know at a major
university with impressive frame relay bandwidth to put on their little
gigabit webpage downloader....(c;

It's great entertainment, once YOU are the one sitting in the driver's
seat, for a change.

I have a friend who simply hands his phone over to his 5-year-old son.
His little son orders all kinds of stuff for free! I think he has a
condo in Miami, come to think of it!

Larry
--
This spammer called my cellphone:
First American Payment
10101 E Arapaho Rd
Richardson, TX 75081
972-301-3766
They were nasty when I politely said I wasn't interested....(c;

SlobbyDon

2007-05-07, 10:33 am

Todd Allcock wrote:
> At 05 May 2007 03:54:50 +0000 Larry wrote:
>
>
> I don't believe this story for one second...
>
> Oh, I believe the spammer called your cellphone, but I don't believe
> you were polite! ;-)

I believe it was a bill collector dunning Larry.

--
SlobbyDon

Steven J. Sobol

2007-05-07, 10:33 am

In article < Xns9928AA52F29E7noon
ehomecom@208.49.80.253>, Larry wrote:

> I was as polite as I could be. Are you happier now, Todd?

If you're on the national DNC list, you ought to file a complaint
against them. Unfortunately there is no private right of action for
violators of the national DNC, so you can't sue them yourself, but the
feds can fine them $11K per violation.

--
Steve Sobol, Professional Geek ** Java/VB/VC/PHP/Perl ** Linux/*BSD/Windows
Victorville, California PGP:0xE3AE35ED

It's all fun and games until someone starts a bonfire in the living room.

Steven J. Sobol

2007-05-07, 10:33 am

In article < Xns99294652FD4Cnoone
homecom@208.49.80.253>, Larry wrote:

> One of my sadistic little pleasures in life, with so many minutes going
> unused on Alltel every month, is trying to see how long I can string
> along a spammer, if I'm not working or have something interesting going
> on when they call.

My boss likes to do that too... it costs them time, which is like gold
to them. I don't typically have the patience, or I'd do it too.

--
Steve Sobol, Professional Geek ** Java/VB/VC/PHP/Perl ** Linux/*BSD/Windows
Victorville, California PGP:0xE3AE35ED

It's all fun and games until someone starts a bonfire in the living room.

Todd Allcock

2007-05-07, 3:33 pm

At 07 May 2007 14:27:54 +0000 Steven J. Sobol wrote:

> If you're on the national DNC list, you ought to file a complaint
> against them. Unfortunately there is no private right of action for
> violators of the national DNC, so you can't sue them yourself, but the
> feds can fine them $11K per violation.

The problem is getting the necessary information to file. The more
nefarious ones block their ID, and I even had one last week that used a
spoofed ID- the ID belonged to a disconnected cellphone in Pompano Beach,
Florida!

My guess is that the DNC rules have weeded out most of the legit
telemarketing calls leaving just the scammers. The "Florida" company
claimed to be calling from "My credit card company" (no actual name)
trying to see if they could get me a lower rate. When I pressed them on
which of "my credit card companies" they were they just continued the
schpiel about how much they could save me. I then demanded to know the
name of the company they represented and they hung up!

Maybe cheap Voip rates have emboldened the e-mail phishers and scammers
into trying telemarketing. I can imagine "eBay" or "PayPal" will be
calling me any minute now to warn me my account has been blocked and to
"verify" my account information! ;-)

XS11E

2007-05-07, 3:33 pm

Todd Allcock < elecconnec@AmericaOn
Line.com> wrote:

> I can imagine "eBay" or "PayPal" will be calling me any minute now
> to warn me my account has been blocked and to "verify" my account
> information! ;-)

Since you brought it up, we do need you to verify your information,
please post your credit card information here along with the expiration
date and the code on the back side.

Thank You,
PayPal

Notice:

As a PayPal member, you may take advantage of these special offers:

*Partner needed to assist in retrieving fifteen million US dollars from
the Bank of Nigeria. Contact Colonel M'Buktu

*Busy bridge for sale in Brooklyn, New York. Contact Dewey, Cheatham
and Howe, Attys.

*Waterfront property for sale in New Orleans, LA. Contact The Hon.
Clarence Ray Nagin, Jr.

Larry

2007-05-07, 10:33 pm

"Steven J. Sobol" <sjsobol@JustThe.net> wrote in
news:slrnf3udv0.edm.sjsobol@amethyst.justthe.net:

> If you're on the national DNC list, you ought to file a complaint
> against them. Unfortunately there is no private right of action for
> violators of the national DNC, so you can't sue them yourself, but the
> feds can fine them $11K per violation.
>
>
> --
> Steve Sobol, Professional Geek

That doesn't work, either. I'm on every anti spam snailmail list on the
planet and EVERY month, without fail, Verizon stuffs my mailbox with spam
begging me to come back and pay them double what I pay now for 100 less
minutes on Alltel's smooth 800 Mhz statewide system for their half-assed
800 Mhz here and PCS there kluged up system of acquisitions.

I called the 877 number and played the Verizon game this morning. Even
their own American TSR couldn't get the OPT OUT phone number to find a
live humanoid! He told me to stop by my local store when he couldn't get
them to answer 843-852-5252, either! He kept getting autoforwarded to
the same old 800-922-0408 that goes to his boiler room.

I stopped by the store and asked the manager how to stop it. He lied and
said he'd do it. I'll be stuffing his office with it from now on...(c;

Larry
--
This spammer called my cellphone:
First American Payment
10101 E Arapaho Rd
Richardson, TX 75081
972-301-3766
They were nasty when I politely said I wasn't interested....(c;

Larry

2007-05-07, 10:33 pm

Todd Allcock < elecconnec@AmericaOn
Line.com> wrote in news:f1nr6c$nan$2
@aioe.org:

> Maybe cheap Voip rates have emboldened the e-mail phishers and scammers
> into trying telemarketing. I can imagine "eBay" or "PayPal" will be
> calling me any minute now to warn me my account has been blocked and to
> "verify" my account information! ;-)
>

If a scam comes from Skype, you'll always see 000-123-4567 for the caller
ID number....NOT "unknown" or something like that. Some smartasses have
started to filter 000-123-4567 as an unknown number. For a long time,
having a real-looking number, of sorts, got the call through. I've never
had a spammer call my Skype number because it uses the same block of
numbers AOHell uses for modems to connect to AOHell. That seems to
exempt us from cold calls to Skype In phone numbers, both numbers in
Charleston, SC, USA and my London, UK Skype In number. I have gotten a
few legit wrong numbers from the London number but they were so
entertaining it was hard to hang up....(c; Gotta love that Cockney
accent, Mate! I think one of Henry Higgins' girls called me one night...
(c;

Larry
--
This spammer called my cellphone:
First American Payment
10101 E Arapaho Rd
Richardson, TX 75081
972-301-3766
They were nasty when I politely said I wasn't interested....(c;

Steven J. Sobol

2007-05-08, 3:33 pm

In article <f1nr6c$nan$2@aioe.org>, Todd Allcock wrote:

> The problem is getting the necessary information to file.

Go after the company whose products or services are being pushed by
the teledroids.

--
Steve Sobol, Professional Geek ** Java/VB/VC/PHP/Perl ** Linux/*BSD/Windows
Victorville, California PGP:0xE3AE35ED

It's all fun and games until someone starts a bonfire in the living room.

Steven J. Sobol

2007-05-08, 3:33 pm

In article < Xns9929C2CD2D070noon
ehomecom@208.49.80.253>, Larry wrote:

[color=darkred]
> That doesn't work, either. I'm on every anti spam snailmail list on the
> planet and EVERY month, without fail, Verizon stuffs my mailbox with spam
> begging me to come back and pay them double what I pay now for 100 less
> minutes on Alltel's smooth 800 Mhz statewide system for their half-assed
> 800 Mhz here and PCS there kluged up system of acquisitions.

We weren't talking about snail mail, we were talking about phone calls.

--
Steve Sobol, Professional Geek ** Java/VB/VC/PHP/Perl ** Linux/*BSD/Windows
Victorville, California PGP:0xE3AE35ED

It's all fun and games until someone starts a bonfire in the living room.

Thomas T. Veldhouse

2007-05-08, 3:33 pm

Bob F. <bob@n0zpamfurtaw.com> wrote:
> I just snapped my 2 brand new RAZR phones in half, brought them into the
> Verizon store and read them the riot act in front of lots of customers about
> how they deleted features from the phones that Motorola intended to be
> there.
>
> Then I went down to the Sprint store and bought two new RAZR phones.
>

Yeah ... sure you did.

--
Thomas T. Veldhouse
Key Fingerprint: D281 77A5 63EE 82C5 5E68 00E4 7868 0ADC 4EFB 39F0

Larry

2007-05-08, 10:33 pm

"Steven J. Sobol" <sjsobol@JustThe.net> wrote in
news:slrnf41g2j.pv5.sjsobol@amethyst.justthe.net:

>
> We weren't talking about snail mail, we were talking about phone
> calls.
>
>

Is that because I'm talking about VERIZON, your pet?

Larry
--
This spammer called my cellphone:
First American Payment
10101 E Arapaho Rd
Richardson, TX 75081
972-301-3766
They were nasty when I politely said I wasn't interested....(c;

Steven J. Sobol

2007-05-09, 3:33 pm

In article < Xns992AC61F2A4FAnoon
ehomecom@208.49.80.253>, Larry wrote:

>
> Is that because I'm talking about VERIZON, your pet?

No. I'll point you again at http://stevesobol.com/goodbye_vzw - again,
I'll remind you that they pissed me off to the point that I left them
in 2004. Of course, you ignored that *again.* I Must Be An Apologist
Because I DARED To Question the Great Larry!

I don't even use Verizon for my landline anymore; I use Charter Cable.
When we moved our TV and cable Internet service to our new house, they
offered us a deal on their telephone service too, so we're trying it.
No problems so far.

I was just pointing out that Verizon snail-spamming you is completely
irrelevant to this discussion. I'm not even arguing that Verizon's
snail-spamming is OK. Legal? Sure. But I am sure it's annoying as
hell, and I wouldn't like it either. But we're talking about phone
calls. I'm sorry if that offends you.

Wait... I take that back. I'm not sorry at all. :)

Hm. Now, let's see. What's next? My guess is that you'll completely
ignore this reply.

--
Steve Sobol, Professional Geek ** Java/VB/VC/PHP/Perl ** Linux/*BSD/Windows
Victorville, California PGP:0xE3AE35ED

It's all fun and games until someone starts a bonfire in the living room.

XS11E

2007-05-09, 10:33 pm

"Steven J. Sobol" <sjsobol@JustThe.net> wrote:

> No. I'll point you again at http://stevesobol.com/goodbye_vzw -

Seems the website is down?

> I Must Be An Apologist Because I DARED To Question the Great Larry!

I'm a bit confused, could you explain the difference between
"Questioning the Great Larry" and "Feeding the Trolls?"

Maybe it's best to do neither?

Steven J. Sobol

2007-05-09, 10:33 pm

In article < Xns992B974B19A0Fxs11
eyahoocom@69.28.173.184>, XS11E wrote:
> "Steven J. Sobol" <sjsobol@JustThe.net> wrote:
>
>
> Seems the website is down?

Well, I'll be damned. Yes, I'm completely revamping the website, but
that URL is still supposed to forward to the Google Groups thread
where I tell people I'm leaving VZW.

Viewing the source for that page reveals, for some reason, the PHP
code that is supposed to do the redirect. That is *badly* broken, and
I apologize. Hold on a minute.

**tinker**

OK. Fixed!

>
> I'm a bit confused, could you explain the difference between
> "Questioning the Great Larry" and "Feeding the Trolls?"

Honestly... there is none.

> Maybe it's best to do neither?

Probably, but how else can I entertain myself? :D

--
Steve Sobol, Professional Geek ** Java/VB/VC/PHP/Perl ** Linux/*BSD/Windows
Victorville, California PGP:0xE3AE35ED

It's all fun and games until someone starts a bonfire in the living room.

XS11E

2007-05-09, 10:33 pm

"Steven J. Sobol" <sjsobol@JustThe.net> wrote:

> In article < Xns992B974B19A0Fxs11
eyahoocom@69.28.173.184>, XS11E
> wrote:
[color=darkred]
> Hold on a minute.
>
> **tinker**
>
> OK. Fixed!

Got it!

LinkBot