 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion Groups General General TopicsGSMBluetoothProviders AlltelATT WirelessCingularFidoNextelSprint PCST-MobileVerizonManufacturers EricssonNokiaMotorolaCountry Specific Australian GroupUK GroupRelated Topics PocketPCPalmMore Topics ... |
Cellular Phone Forum / Providers / Sprint PCS / November 2005phone as modem
sprint now says no, we do not support using any of our phones as a modem. only PDA type devices or plug in cards. time tolook for a different carrier. formeg verizen. you do not work for me because I cannot hear you now. mikeyhsd@sport.rr.com >"mikeyhsd" <mikeyhsd@sport.rr.com> wrote in message news:3aJbf.78674$GQ.45216@tornado.texas.rr.com... >sprint now says no, we do not support using any of our phones as a modem. > >only PDA type devices or plug in cards. > >time tolook for a different carrier. "We do not support" is different than "it won't be allowed." The former has been Sprint's official position for quite a while. Yet they have not disabled casual use of one's phone as a modem.  SignatureJohn Richards > >"mikeyhsd" <mikeyhsd@sport.rr.com> wrote in message news:3aJbf.78674$GQ.45216@tornado.texas.rr.com... > >sprint now says no, we do not support using any of our phones as a modem. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > The former has been Sprint's official position for quite a while. > Yet they have not disabled casual use of one's phone as a modem. The operative word is "casual." While checking/sending e-mail, quick searches, etc. would probably keep you under the radar, surfing might be enough to draw attention. Notan On Mon, 07 Nov 2005 15:58:33 GMT, "John Richards" >>"mikeyhsd" <mikeyhsd@sport.rr.com> wrote >>sprint now says no, we do not support using any of our phones as a modem. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >The former has been Sprint's official position for quite a while. >Yet they have not disabled casual use of one's phone as a modem. True, but only a couple of months ago, Sprint was offering data plan add-ons, to allow phones to be used as modems. Have they changed their tune again??? Joe Huber huber.joseph@comcast.net > On Mon, 07 Nov 2005 15:58:33 GMT, "John Richards" > >>"mikeyhsd" <mikeyhsd@sport.rr.com> wrote [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > add-ons, to allow phones to be used as modems. Have they changed > their tune again??? Just last month, those brochures were still available. Notan worked fine last night. sprint now says no, we do not support using any of our phones as a modem. only PDA type devices or plug in cards. time tolook for a different carrier. formeg verizen. you do not work for me because I cannot hear you now. mikeyhsd@sport.rr.com so what software did you use. and what phone. mikeyhsd@sport.rr.com worked fine last night. "mikeyhsd" <mikeyhsd@sport.rr.com> wrote in message news:3aJbf.78674$GQ.45216@tornado.texas.rr.com... sprint now says no, we do not support using any of our phones as a modem. only PDA type devices or plug in cards. time tolook for a different carrier. formeg verizen. you do not work for me because I cannot hear you now. mikeyhsd@sport.rr.com First off, quit with the html posting ... Next, no software needed. Just need to download the modem driver for your phone and set up a new DUN, with #777 as the number, leaving the user name and password fields empty. Bob ---------------------------------- so what software did you use. and what phone. mikeyhsd@sport.rr.com worked fine last night. "mikeyhsd" <mikeyhsd@sport.rr.com> wrote in message news:3aJbf.78674$GQ.45216@tornado.texas.rr.com... sprint now says no, we do not support using any of our phones as a modem. only PDA type devices or plug in cards. time tolook for a different carrier. formeg verizen. you do not work for me because I cannot hear you now. mikeyhsd@sport.rr.com so where are the modem drivers. I have a copy of Furure Dial programs but does not work with XP-64. only 32 bit OS. mikeyhsd@sport.rr.com First off, quit with the html posting ... Next, no software needed. Just need to download the modem driver for your phone and set up a new DUN, with #777 as the number, leaving the user name and password fields empty. Bob ---------------------------------- "mikeyhsd" <mikeyhsd@sport.rr.com> wrote in message news:EuSbf.54691$5e4.14194@tornado.texas.rr.com... so what software did you use. and what phone. mikeyhsd@sport.rr.com "John Doe" <divx@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:sbObf.63$om5.46@dukeread04... worked fine last night. "mikeyhsd" <mikeyhsd@sport.rr.com> wrote in message news:3aJbf.78674$GQ.45216@tornado.texas.rr.com... sprint now says no, we do not support using any of our phones as a modem. only PDA type devices or plug in cards. time tolook for a different carrier. formeg verizen. you do not work for me because I cannot hear you now. mikeyhsd@sport.rr.com Jeez, can't you take a hint not to post in HTML? As for the drivers, which phone do you have? And don't reply in HTML ... Bob -------------------------------------------- so where are the modem drivers. I have a copy of Furure Dial programs but does not work with XP-64. only 32 bit OS. mikeyhsd@sport.rr.com First off, quit with the html posting ... Next, no software needed. Just need to download the modem driver for your phone and set up a new DUN, with #777 as the number, leaving the user name and password fields empty. Bob ---------------------------------- "mikeyhsd" <mikeyhsd@sport.rr.com> wrote in message news:EuSbf.54691$5e4.14194@tornado.texas.rr.com... so what software did you use. and what phone. mikeyhsd@sport.rr.com worked fine last night. "mikeyhsd" <mikeyhsd@sport.rr.com> wrote in message news:3aJbf.78674$GQ.45216@tornado.texas.rr.com... sprint now says no, we do not support using any of our phones as a modem. only PDA type devices or plug in cards. time tolook for a different carrier. formeg verizen. you do not work for me because I cannot hear you now. mikeyhsd@sport.rr.com sanyo rl4920 mikeyhsd@sport.rr.com > Jeez, can't you take a hint not to post in HTML? > [quoted text clipped - 36 lines] > > mikeyhsd@sport.rr.com > sanyo rl4920 Futuredial's site says your phone is supported. Go to http://futuredial.com/support/download/USB_Drivers.htm, scroll down to the sanyo driver download link, download it and install it. Plug in your phone into the laptop, point it to the newly downloaded driver and set up your DUN. Bob I have Fiuture Dial as said earlier. they do not support 64 bit os and advised no plans to. so am looking for another alternative. mikeyhsd@sport.rr.com >> sanyo rl4920 > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Bob > I have Fiuture Dial as said earlier. > they do not support 64 bit os and advised no plans to. > so am looking for another alternative. Have you tried using your existing drivers? Notan again they do not work in 64 bit os. mikeyhsd@sport.rr.com >> I have Fiuture Dial as said earlier. >> they do not support 64 bit os and advised no plans to. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Notan > again > they do not work in 64 bit os. > > <snip> I understand that FutereDial doesn't "support" them, but have you actually tried? Notan Due respect goes to anyone who would even think about running a Microsoft alpha release Operating System. They have yet to get a single OS version out of beta testing. > Due respect goes to anyone who would even think about running a > Microsoft alpha release Operating System. > > They have yet to get a single OS version out of beta testing. Well IMNSHO mikeyhsd, prolific writer that he is, should have mentioned his OS in the first friggin' post--not the tenth. While Windows XP 64-bit is of course not, technically, alpha, 32-bit drivers won't work with it; and that's obviously where his problem lies. That should have been what his first question was about, preferably without the HTML and scrolling signature. From what Paul wrote, it would appear SPCS will be offering tethered data plans, as well as connection kits, in the near future. Betcha they don't include XP 64 support either. I would ask why he has the need to run XP 64, but have no desire to interpret a two-line cryptic reply. (And I don't mean that in a bad kinda way.) SignatureMike > From what Paul wrote, it would appear SPCS will be offering tethered > data plans, as well as connection kits, in the near future. Betcha they > don't include XP 64 support either. The tethering plans were included in advertising brochures (available in stores) starting back in July. And they also show up on the Sprint plans pages. SignatureRØß O/Siris -+- A thing moderately good is not so good as it ought to be. Moderation in temper is always a virtue, but moderation in principle is always a vice. +Thomas Paine, "The Rights of Man", 1792+ > > From what Paul wrote, it would appear SPCS will be offering tethered > > data plans, as well as connection kits, in the near future. Betcha they [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > stores) starting back in July. And they also show up on the Sprint > plans pages. Earlier in this thread, you said "Sprint stopped supporting that about 6 months after Vision was launched." Have you changed your mind? Notan its very simnple, I prefer to run a MODERN compuer instead of a teletype that cannot interpret HTML. mikeyhsd@sport.rr.com >> Due respect goes to anyone who would even think about running a >> Microsoft alpha release Operating System. [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > interpret a two-line cryptic reply. (And I don't mean that in a bad kinda > way.) > its very simnple, I prefer to run a MODERN compuer instead of a teletype > that cannot interpret HTML. HTML has got nothing to do with old or new / modern computers. It's got to do with posting in a different language, one which adds more coding, and does not allow for proper formatting when bottom posting. HTML is great for creating word docs, etc, but it's not good to use in Usenet, where replies usually follow the originating post. It's the operator, you, who doesn't realize the difference. Bob > its very simnple, I prefer to run a MODERN compuer instead of a > teletype that cannot interpret HTML. Please excuse my amusement over the fact that your "MODERN compuer" can't deal with a modern cellphone using readily available drivers. XP 64? BTDT months-ago. Now, if I was feeling grouchy I might point out that anyone running XP 64 who couldn't figure out this ridiculously easy-to-diagnose issue on their own should back away from the computer and use WebTV. But I'm in a good mood so won't do that. Oh yea, anyone, using almost any OS still running today, can choose to post in HTML. Or they can choose not to. As most people can tell within a few moments that posting in HTML is not the norm in a given NG this is obviously just a case of PEBKAM. Alas, this seems to be the norm for the "Web forum" generation--with their 100 KB avatars and 500 KB garish--but animated!--signatures. SignatureMike Tell us what you really think, Mike. > Tell us what you really think, Mike. Well I did trim the profanity before sending, as it occurred to me Mikey might be a minor. SignatureMike | Last words of Thomas Grasso, executed in 1995: | "I did not get my Spaghetti-O's, I got spaghetti. | I want the press to know this." Tinman: This isn't your choice, or your argument to win or loose. Usenet messages are supposed to be in English and in plain text, period, end of discussion. The computer you are using, your age, your level of education has nothing to do with it. It's a standard that has been set and has been supported for years. If you cannot live with it and abide by it, you are welcome to post elsewhere. In the meantime, if you are coming here asking for advice, stop pissing off and bitting the hands that feed you. >> Tell us what you really think, Mike. > > Well I did trim the profanity before sending, as it occurred to me Mikey > might be a minor. > Tinman: > > This isn't your choice, or your argument to win or loose. WTF are you talking about? > Usenet messages are supposed to be in English and in plain text, > period, end of discussion. No. You forgot about quoting, which--had you done properly--might have better explained your nonsensical first sentence. > The computer you are using, your age, > your level of education has nothing to do with it. It's a standard > that has been set and has been supported for years. If you cannot > live with it and abide by it, you are welcome to post elsewhere. Hey, Einstein, please tell me--the one who posts "in English and in plain text"--what the f.ck your point is. > In the meantime, if you are coming here asking for advice, stop > pissing off and bitting the hands that feed you. While you're at it, you might as well point out all of the "advice" I've been asking for lately--and all of the help you have given. SignatureMike | If a million monkeys typed on a million | keyboards for a million years, eventually all | the works of Shakespeare would be produced. | Thanks to Usenet, we know this is not true. > Tinman: > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > In the meantime, if you are coming here asking for advice, stop pissing > off and bitting the hands that feed you. <snipped> 1) It appears that you should follow your own words, as the original standard of posting on usenet is to bottom post on replies. 2) Next, and most important, if you are going to take the time to post a reply, make sure you reply to the correct party. Tinman / Mike has been posting in plain text. It's mikeyhsd who has been posting in HTML ... It's mikeyhsd who has been asking for advice ... Bob >> Tinman: >> [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > has been posting in plain text. It's mikeyhsd who has been posting in > HTML ... It's mikeyhsd who has been asking for advice ... Thanks, Bob, for the nice contrast to my "slightly" more caustic reply. ;-) SignatureMike > Due respect goes to anyone who would even think about running a > Microsoft alpha release Operating System. Windows XP 64-bit isn't Alpha. It's commercially released. SignatureRØß O/Siris -+- A thing moderately good is not so good as it ought to be. Moderation in temper is always a virtue, but moderation in principle is always a vice. +Thomas Paine, "The Rights of Man", 1792+ >please_reply_to_group_only@yahoo.com says... >> Due respect goes to anyone who would even think about running a >> Microsoft alpha release Operating System. > >Windows XP 64-bit isn't Alpha. It's commercially released. He was probably being sarcastic. Given the multitude of bug fixes and security patches that are released for any MS operating system, up until the day that MS stops oficially supporting that OS, one might consider any MS OS to be Alpha, whether it's commercially released or not... In fact, Windows Update is just about to install another security patch on my Win2Kpro computer. Win2K has only been out for 6 years now. Joe Huber huber.joseph@comcast.net >Windows XP 64-bit isn't Alpha. It's commercially released. Surely you gest. Windows 95 never made it out of Alpha. It didn't stop them from "commercially releasing" it. There are very few 64-bit drivers of any kind available. If you're running a 64-bit OS it should not be your main or solo OS. If it was me, I'd be dual-booting the 64-bit OS and a 32-bit OS. You need the latter to get any real work done. SignatureJohn Richards > again > they do not work in 64 bit os. not really. the only thing not available for me at this time is drivers to connect phone to computer and my lexmrk printer. of course with lexmark if it is over 2 years old, forget it. of course my computer was specially built with 64 bit os in mind. I had the printer and phone before getting the computer. mikeyhsd@sport.rr.com > There are very few 64-bit drivers of any kind available. > If you're running a 64-bit OS it should not be your main or solo OS. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >> again >> they do not work in 64 bit os. >of course my computer was specially built with 64 bit os in mind. I have a couple of 100% 64 bit OS-ready computers built. The ONLY one that is of any consquence, is the box running 64 bit Linux. Do I see a performance difference? In benchmarks .... some of them yes, in day-to-day computing .... no. And in Windows, almost every application is still wirtten and obtimized for 32 bit OS's. I was able to get a copy of 64 bit Windows it in July. The only performance increase you *might* see is for a program written specifically for 64bit Windows. And then you get to worry about these little niggling things like a driver here and there that won't work, and the brand spanking new bugs that have long since been ironed out in the 32 bit versions of XP and Win2000. Eventually it will be an almost compeltely 64 bit world. Maybe in 5 years. But in that time, that nice, shiny AMD 64 3800+ is going to become a dinosaur. I scrapped Win 64bit, as there was no benefit (unless I wanted to load tha machine with over 4 gigs of ram), and being an alpha tester on the leading edge of little benefit is ovverrated. I've done it many times before. If you are happy with Win 64, I am happy for you. But these little problems that you are encoutnering now *probably* aren't worth whatever benefit you might be getting out of the OS, IMHO. Then again, maybe they are .... I'll go to that OS when AMD releases a 7000+ chip, every major vendor has made 64 bit versions of their OS, and good folks such as yourself have already forwarded their core dumps to Microsoft for 2 years. > Eventually it will be an almost compeltely 64 bit world. Maybe in 5 > years. Just think how much faster we'll be able to reply to posts on Usenet! :) Signatureda ~~ > > Eventually it will be an almost compeltely 64 bit world. Maybe in 5 > > years. > > Just think how much faster we'll be able to reply to posts on Usenet! > :) Or ignore others! <g> Notan > sprint now says no, we do not support using any of our phones as a modem. > > only PDA type devices or plug in cards. Now? Sprint stopped supporting that about 6 months after Vision was launched. SignatureRØß O/Siris -+- A thing moderately good is not so good as it ought to be. Moderation in temper is always a virtue, but moderation in principle is always a vice. +Thomas Paine, "The Rights of Man", 1792+ Beg to differ. Sprint offers plans for phones as modem. In article <3aJbf.78674$GQ.45216@tornado.texas.rr.com>, mikeyhsd@sport.rr.com says... > sprint now says no, we do not support using any of our phones as a modem. > > only PDA type devices or plug in cards. Now? Sprint stopped supporting that about 6 months after Vision was launched. SignatureRØß O/Siris -+- A thing moderately good is not so good as it ought to be. Moderation in temper is always a virtue, but moderation in principle is always a vice. +Thomas Paine, "The Rights of Man", 1792+ > Beg to differ. Sprint offers plans for phones as modem. Offering plans to cover the usage does *not* mean Sprint will provide support for it. As of the last update I had, Sprint does not support this. *Support*. As has already been stated, that is not the same as "allow". SignatureRØß O/Siris -+- A thing moderately good is not so good as it ought to be. Moderation in temper is always a virtue, but moderation in principle is always a vice. +Thomas Paine, "The Rights of Man", 1792+ > > Beg to differ. Sprint offers plans for phones as modem. > > Offering plans to cover the usage does *not* mean Sprint will provide > support for it. As of the last update I had, Sprint does not support > this. Huh? If Sprint offers a plan that includes tethering, how can they not support it? That makes absolutely no sense. Notan >If Sprint offers a plan that includes tethering, how can they not support it? What is there for them to support? You hook it up and dial #777. If you have a data connection, then you are on. If you don't, then check to see if there is vision on the phone. If there is vision on the phone, then you have a problem with the cable or driver, which the driver vendor should support. If the phone cannot connect to vision, the Sprint will certainly support that. The only thing that Sprint has any control over is Vision from the tower to the handset. Everything after that is 3rd party .... so how could Sprint possibly support those things since they have not manufactured or prgrammed any of them? > >If Sprint offers a plan that includes tethering, how can they not support it? > [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > party .... so how could Sprint possibly support those things since they > have not manufactured or prgrammed any of them? If Sprint sold a tethered plan, I'd also expect them to make drivers and cables available. Notan >> >If Sprint offers a plan that includes tethering, how can they not support it? >> [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] >If Sprint sold a tethered plan, I'd also expect them to make drivers >and cables available. From what I hear, you're absolutely correct. Cables and driver CD's --for selected handsets-- will be in stores shortly, with official Sprint support for tethering these handsets. SignaturePaul Miner > From what I hear, you're absolutely correct. Cables and driver CD's > --for selected handsets-- will be in stores shortly, with official > Sprint support for tethering these handsets. Interesting. I hadn't heard that. SignatureRØß O/Siris -+- A thing moderately good is not so good as it ought to be. Moderation in temper is always a virtue, but moderation in principle is always a vice. +Thomas Paine, "The Rights of Man", 1792+ >> From what I hear, you're absolutely correct. Cables and driver CD's >> --for selected handsets-- will be in stores shortly, with official >> Sprint support for tethering these handsets. > >Interesting. I hadn't heard that. My friends say the network portion is ready, and all that remains is to finish testing on the back end (billing systems). Once that is done, the cables & drivers will be released to the stores. The new plans are already listed (somewhere) on the Sprint web site. Of course, if the testing craps out, none of this will happen as soon as I've been led to believe... SignaturePaul Miner >>> If Sprint offers a plan that includes tethering, how can they not >>> support it? [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > If Sprint sold a tethered plan, I'd also expect them to make drivers > and cables available. As they have in the past ("Connection Kits"), which their selective memory apparently has forgotten all about. Further, the need for support is evidenced by the people posting here, and at similar forums. People who couldn't set up a DUN connection to save their lives, let alone understand #777 really is the number to "dial" and that you really, REALLY, don't need to enter a username and password. And do be sure that BPS isn't set at 19,200 and that you have chosen the proper modem for the connection. Tell those people, paying $40+ per month for the "privilege" of tethering that they get zero support to help them get started (and this is the kind of support that is generally needed once--just to get them going). Go ahead and tell them that SPCS won't supply a cable for this pricey service and that the vendors who sold them a one-time purchase of $20 for it are responsible for carrier-specific support (above and beyond a simple FAQ). Perhaps they might just chalk up the $20 as a lesson learned and tell SPCS to forget about that extra $500 per-year in revenue. Not everyone is interested in all the nuances that modern technology literally requires one to understand nowadays. In fact, if one wanted to keep 100% up-to-date on every piece of technology in their lives it would probably be the equivalent of a full-time job. How ironic. SignatureMike >Tell those people, paying $40+ per month for the "privilege" of >tethering that they get zero support to help them get started Seriously, whether they "support" it or not, do you think you are going to get actual "support"? For crying out loud when I had trouble with an issue on my Treo 600, Tier 1 "tech support" advised me to remove my battery. When I asked him which screwdriver I should use sine the batter is non-removable, he said "Oh, i'll have to have someone call you back". Nobody ever did. I finally founfd a solution online. Anyone who is going to DEPEND on Sprint for tech support might as well go to the zoo and solicit help from a rhesus monkey. People who are tethering phones to laptops are generally tech savvy and/or know where to look for the information when they need help. If you are going to depend on Sprint for the technical support, you probably should not be considering whatever it is you are looking to buy. Unless it is extremely simple (and even then it is a crapshoot), in all practical terms, you are going to have to "support" it yourself, or find some good folks online that have already discovered the solution. >From my experience, Sprint's "support" stops at the tower, and "remove the battery" is the extent of all hardware support. Someone here, like Mike, will turn out to be the support you will come to depend on. > Go ahead and tell them that SPCS won't supply a cable for this > pricey service and that the vendors who sold them a one-time purchase of > $20 for it are responsible for carrier-specific support (above and > beyond a simple FAQ). Now hold on, "we won't support it" is NOT saying the 3rd party OEM has an obligation to support it. SignatureRØß O/Siris -+- A thing moderately good is not so good as it ought to be. Moderation in temper is always a virtue, but moderation in principle is always a vice. +Thomas Paine, "The Rights of Man", 1792+ >> Go ahead and tell them that SPCS won't supply a cable for this >> pricey service and that the vendors who sold them a one-time [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Now hold on, "we won't support it" is NOT saying the 3rd party OEM has > an obligation to support it. I didn't mean to imply that was the case; just sarcasm. It's moot now anyway, if the post from Paul was correct. SignatureMike > If Sprint offers a plan that includes tethering, how can they not support it? As long as they are explicit about not supporting it, they can do that. It's their way of saying, "OK, you really, really want to do this, we're not going to penalize you any longer, but we're aso not going to help you do it." Last I heard, that was the basic idea. Yeah, you can do it now, and here's something to cover it, but you're still on your own getting it to work. BUT, "last I heard" right pretty close to the time these plans launched back in (I think) July. Maybe it's changed. I haven't heard so if it has. SignatureRØß O/Siris -+- A thing moderately good is not so good as it ought to be. Moderation in temper is always a virtue, but moderation in principle is always a vice. +Thomas Paine, "The Rights of Man", 1792+ Well, don't know what you define as "support", but Sprint offers a phone as modem plan, think its $25/month for 40 mb. Its new, so USB cables are not available for lots of phones through Sprint, but have certainly been available elsewhere. And new phones , especially Power Vision phones, will have cables available in stores. In article <mibcf.4656$AF6.2580@trndny08>, dundat1@verizon.net says... > Beg to differ. Sprint offers plans for phones as modem. Offering plans to cover the usage does *not* mean Sprint will provide support for it. As of the last update I had, Sprint does not support this. *Support*. As has already been stated, that is not the same as "allow". SignatureRØß O/Siris -+- A thing moderately good is not so good as it ought to be. Moderation in temper is always a virtue, but moderation in principle is always a vice. +Thomas Paine, "The Rights of Man", 1792+ > Well, don't know what you define as "support", but Sprint offers a phone as > modem plan, think its $25/month for 40 mb. Its new, so USB cables are not > available for lots of phones through Sprint, but have certainly been > available elsewhere. And new phones , especially Power Vision phones, will > have cables available in stores. If Sprint sells the hardware, then they'd better support it. If all they do is provide allowances for it (i.e. phone as modem plan packs), then lack of support would still be understandable. Bad idea, IMO, but understandable. SignatureRØß O/Siris -+- A thing moderately good is not so good as it ought to be. Moderation in temper is always a virtue, but moderation in principle is always a vice. +Thomas Paine, "The Rights of Man", 1792+ >If Sprint sells the hardware, then they'd better support it. Or what? They told me to remove the battery from my Treo 600 for crying out loud. If they don't support it, you will have to go online and find support for it. Sprint really doesn't really HAVE to do anything, although it would be nice if someone over there knew that the Treo 600 has a non-removable battery. "Sprint Support" = "Remove, then replace the battery" There I just provided everyone here with a year's worth of Sprint hardware support. Email me and I'll tell you where to send the check. > >If Sprint sells the hardware, then they'd better support it. > > Or what? > > They told me to remove the battery from my Treo 600 for crying out > loud. I'm curious, are you talking about the first rep you spoke to, or to an actual Vision tech? I once went three days straight where pulling the battery from a Vision phone fixed every call that came to me. You have to consciously remind yourself to actually pay attention to the phone model when you get into a rut like that. Doesn't excuse the error, but I can still understand where it might happen. Once is not a trend. "Or what?" Or they really *do* open themselves up to legal action. SignatureRØß O/Siris -+- A thing moderately good is not so good as it ought to be. Moderation in temper is always a virtue, but moderation in principle is always a vice. +Thomas Paine, "The Rights of Man", 1792+ >I'm curious, are you talking about the first rep you spoke to, or to an >actual Vision tech? "Teir 1 Technical Support". Whatever that is. >I once went three days straight where pulling the battery from a Vision >phone fixed every call that came to me. You have to consciously remind >yourself to actually pay attention to the phone model when you get into >a rut like that. Well, yeah. And when a phone has a non-removable battery, and you have no support ideas other than "remove the battery", then support for such people pretty much ends. Like I said, nobody ever called me back, but someone on a forum was able to help me. That's exactly why I said that Sprint Tech support IS "remove the battery" ... because if that doesn't work, you may be SOL as far as Sprint is concerned. At least I was. >Doesn't excuse the error, but I can still understand where it might >happen. Once is not a trend. I agree, it's not a trend. But the promised call back never occured either (phone cals were working fine). So, I only tried Sprint "support" twice, and they batted .000 Now, I don't buy a product I can't support myself, or that the manufacturer or someone other than Sprint can support. Screw me once it's your fault, twice it's mine. In order for Sprint to support a hardware device, it has to have a removable battery. Which a data cable doesn't have. So I don't know what quality of service these guys are going to get, which is why they should probably figure it out before they put a whole lot of money into the tethering solution. ""Or what?" Or they really *do* open themselves up to legal action. " Except that they make you sign your rights away to a class action or jury trial (and from what I can tell ... for good reason). So they really don't have to do much of anything, unless you want to argue before the court that the arbitration clause is unconciounable, etc, etc. Most people just want something that works out of the box. > >I'm curious, are you talking about the first rep you spoke to, or to an > >actual Vision tech? > > "Teir 1 Technical Support". Whatever that is. That's an actual Vision Tech. Like I said. I was just curious. > >I once went three days straight where pulling the battery from a Vision > >phone fixed every call that came to me. You have to consciously remind [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > people pretty much ends. Like I said, nobody ever called me back, but > someone on a forum was able to help me. As I recall, you continuously stopped describing the call at the point of the battery mixup. If they really did give up the call at that point, that's assinine. If you'll humor me for a bit, do you happen to recall the precise nature of the problem? > That's exactly why I said that Sprint Tech support IS "remove the > battery" ... because if that doesn't work, you may be SOL as far as > Sprint is concerned. At least I was. Not while I was there. But, having said that, some Vision techs have been doing this since the days of the Treo 300. It's battery, too, was integrated. > >Doesn't excuse the error, but I can still understand where it might > >happen. Once is not a trend. > > I agree, it's not a trend. But the promised call back never occured > either (phone cals were working fine). So, I only tried Sprint > "support" twice, and they batted .000 Can't say I blame you. > Now, I don't buy a product I can't support myself, or that the > manufacturer or someone other than Sprint can support. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > should probably figure it out before they put a whole lot of money into > the tethering solution. Now you're getting facetious. Why exaggerate beyond all touch with reality? You've already made your point. Now you're losing it. First of all, it's a different level of support dealing with issues like that. Tier 1 is (or was, when I worked there) strictly limited ot making sure the phone itself works. Data cables would be handled by Tier II. Second of all, a promised callback has nothing to do with how much the techs do or don't know. It has to do with diligence. You're cutting yourself with your own blade swinging wildly like that. > ""Or what?" Or they really *do* open themselves up to legal action. " > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > before the court that the arbitration clause is unconciounable, etc, > etc. If an entire class of customers is wrongly affected, I think that steps outside the bounds of arbitration. > Most people just want something that works out of the box. I don't think that's true in this context. This use as a modem is, almost by definition, stepping outside "out of the box" functionality. SignatureRØß O/Siris -+- A thing moderately good is not so good as it ought to be. Moderation in temper is always a virtue, but moderation in principle is always a vice. +Thomas Paine, "The Rights of Man", 1792+ "As I recall, you continuously stopped describing the call at the point of the battery mixup. If they really did give up the call at that point, that's assinine." Yes, I thought so. "If you'll humor me for a bit, do you happen to recall the precise nature of the problem? " This was almost a year and a half ago, but when trying to access vision it returned an error code, something like (Cannot connect to vision Error: XX0123 - Please contact your service provider) ... or something of that nature. This went on for 3 days. Tech support did not know the error code, and had no idea why it was happening. Promised a call back. Never did. Posted the issue to a phone forum. Had it answered in about 90 minutes. So, in theory, Sprint should have paid that guy for my support. Never again have I (or will I) get a Sprint device that I cannot readily find support for other than Sprint. >From my personal experience, I will be left sitting by the phone (18 months later, and I'm still waiting for that callback). "Now you're getting facetious. Why exaggerate beyond all touch with reality? You've already made your point. Now you're losing it." In what way? That is my official position on the matter based on first hand experience, and the policy has served me extremely well. " First of all, it's a different level of support dealing with issues like that." And I did't get the apparopriate level of support because ............ ? "Tier 1 is (or was, when I worked there) strictly limited ot making sure the phone itself works. Data cables would be handled by Tier II." And my issue should have been handled by ........... ? "Second of all, a promised callback has nothing to do with how much the techs do or don't know. It has to do with diligence. " Fine. So they just didn't give a sh.t. I'm not sure that this makes me feel better. I didn't receive support not because someone didn't know the answer, I didn't receive support because nobody cared. Six of one, half dozen of the other in my book. You either get support or you don't. To date, I haven't (at least not from Sprint). "If an entire class of customers is wrongly affected, I think that steps outside the bounds of arbitration. " No. It doesn't. Read the contract. The only way to pave such a lawsuit would be for someone (most likely a lawyer) to have a judge declare the contract "unconcionable". They may be able to, they may not. But if all you want is a working data cable, this is tall order. "I don't think that's true in this context. This use as a modem is, almost by definition, stepping outside "out of the box" functionality. " ??? Really?? Then I must be a f.cking genius. I have done it with other carriers and have been running within 3 minutes, and most of that time was spent cuting through that horrid plastic safe that they packaged the cable in. I have no idea why people think this is rocket science, if you have the drivers, and the appropriate cable for the appropriate phone, arguable nothing could be easier. People have been setting up DUN since Windows 3.1. Granted that most people who use this solution are indeed tech savvy people (Most AOL users wouldn't know how to set this up, and Mom wouldn't try it), but anyone who can set up dialup networking shouldn't have a great problem. While not as simple as creating an email in Outlook, I wouldn't call this "out of the box". > And my issue should have been handled by ........... ? Look again at the title of this thread. That's what I mean by this would be handled by a different level of support. SignatureRØß O/Siris -+- A thing moderately good is not so good as it ought to be. Moderation in temper is always a virtue, but moderation in principle is always a vice. +Thomas Paine, "The Rights of Man", 1792+ > "If an entire class of customers is wrongly affected, I think that > steps [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > declare the contract "unconcionable". They may be able to, they may > not. Maybe. I gave an opinion. That's what "I think..." means. If you know more legal information than I, you're welcome to it. > But if all you want is a working data cable, this is tall order. > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > was spent cuting through that horrid plastic safe that they packaged > the cable in. It's that easy, usually, with Sprint phones, too. I'm curious, how many phones advertise their ability to be used as a modem? So far as I'm aware, none of them. Thus, it is not an "out of the box" functionality. It may work (i.e. Samsungs), it may not (i.e. Sanyos). Whatever the cause of either, you will not find any claims by the respective manufacturers that this is a designed functionality of the phones. Or, to be more precise, I've not found any. > I have no idea why people think this is rocket science, if you have the > drivers, and the appropriate cable for the appropriate phone, arguable > nothing could be easier. You're exaggerating. Again. I said NOTHING like this. Look, maybe if we take the conversation outside cell phones for a moment, you'll understand what I'm saying: a U.S. football. If you use it as a pillow, it's not difficult to do, but you're not going to find any makers of footballs (at least the pigskin kind) advertising that they can be used as a pillow. This use is, therefore, not an "out of the box functionality". I realize that analogy falls short in several ways. But the core points are the same as my point about cell phones. It isn't harmful, or difficult, or "new", or ANYTHING except not a use for which the manufacturer advertises of its product. You are reading WAY more into what I posted than I actually said. > People have been setting up DUN since Windows 3.1. So? People have been making phones calls even longer than that, and we still get the same sorts of "how do I make a call?" support calls that date all the way back to then. How long it's been around isn't relevant. > Granted that most people who use this solution are indeed tech savvy > people (Most AOL users wouldn't know how to set this up, and Mom > wouldn't try it), but anyone who can set up dialup networking shouldn't > have a great problem. And this denies that the manufacturers don't advertise this... how? > While not as simple as creating an email in Outlook, I wouldn't call > this "out of the box". You're changing your own definition. I said it's NOT "out of the box". By the very context *you set*, it's not. It's not an intended use of the phone in the sense that any manufacturer advertises this kind of use. Thus, it's not an "out of the box" functionality. Do you see the "not" there this time? SignatureRØß O/Siris -+- A thing moderately good is not so good as it ought to be. Moderation in temper is always a virtue, but moderation in principle is always a vice. +Thomas Paine, "The Rights of Man", 1792+ "It may work (i.e. Samsungs), it may not (i.e. Sanyos). Whatever the cause of either, you will not find any claims by the respective manufacturers that this is a designed functionality of the phones. Or, to be more precise, I've not found any." There are at least two I know that advertise the functionality. I don't want to post them, because I don't want everyone to clamor for them and haev Sprint clamp down on it. (not that they would be terribly hard to find) But two on the Sprint network do, indeed, advertise this. "You're exaggerating. Again. I said NOTHING like this. Look, maybe if we take the conversation outside cell phones for a moment, you'll understand what I'm saying: a U.S. football. If you use it as a pillow, it's not difficult to do, but you're not going to find any makers of footballs (at least the pigskin kind) advertising that they can be used as a pillow. This use is, therefore, not an "out of the box functionality". A couple of phones sold by Sprint have this out of the box (and work quite well I may add). They work out of the box with Bluetooth only, though. A $25 cable will get you tethered in 3 minutes. "I realize that analogy falls short in several ways. But the core points are the same as my point about cell phones. It isn't harmful, or difficult, or "new", or ANYTHING except not a use for which the manufacturer advertises of its product." But Rob, surely you know that people have been doing this ever since "Vision" started. It may not be the most obvious thing, but even a dolt can figure out how to do it with a web browser and an hour of time. "So? People have been making phones calls even longer than that, and we still get the same sorts of "how do I make a call?" support calls that date all the way back to then. How long it's been around isn't relevant." Yes, there are some (lots actually) of idiots in the world. By that rational we could say that EVERYTHING is beyong the scope of many people, and the statement would probably hold up to scruntiny. However, the audience we are talking about ... people who need or really, really want mobile web access - are likely to be able to figure it out fairly quickly. The people who are asking "how do I make a phone call" are most likely on AOL or Web TV, and don't even know that wireless web access exists. "And this denies that the manufacturers don't advertise this... how?" It is advertised on the tech specs of a couple of phones. I don't know how we keep getting back to this. Is it in the big, fat print? No. Is it in the technical specs? Yes. "You're changing your own definition. I said it's NOT "out of the box". By the very context *you set*, it's not. It's not an intended use of the phone in the sense that any manufacturer advertises this kind of use. Thus, it's not an "out of the box" functionality. Do you see the "not" there this time? " I know at least a dozen people who are using it directly "out of the box" via bluetooth. They purchased nothing other than the phone. You're just assuming DUN requires a cable. For some people it does, for some, it doesn't. It completely depends on your laptop/phone capabilities. You can have DUN working on a couple of models with nothing but a phone and a modern laptop. No drivers. No cables. Just the phone and computer. Straight outta the box ..... > "So? People have been making phones calls even longer than that, and > we [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > rational we could say that EVERYTHING is beyong the scope of many > people, and the statement would probably hold up to scruntiny. It really, really confuses me the way you'll distort the discussion this way. So I'm just not going to bother with you any more. My point was that how long it's been around isn't relevant to whether the functionality is "out of the box" available. NOT about whether it's beyond the scope of people (no matter which people are the subject of the discussion). This is a point you brought up in the first place. About wanting something to function out of the box. Since no one who manufacturers for Sprint places any kind of "phone as modem" use claim on their materials, this isn't something would get included as deserving to work that way. It doesn't matter that it's in fact easy to do. It doesn't matter that's been done for three years (more if you count circuit-switched data, which I don't). What matters is that you have no right to it because no one making these phones is including this in the materials available with phones sold for Sprint service. That's the point. The point YOU RAISED IN THE FIRST PLACE. When you can stick to your own conversations, then I'll reconsider. Until then, you're worthy of nothing but being ignored. SignatureRØß O/Siris -+- A thing moderately good is not so good as it ought to be. Moderation in temper is always a virtue, but moderation in principle is always a vice. +Thomas Paine, "The Rights of Man", 1792+ "It really, really confuses me the way you'll distort the discussion this way. So I'm just not going to bother with you any more." You *ALWAYS* say that in every thread, just before proceeding to "bother with me". "My point was" See I told you. "that how long it's been around isn't relevant to whether the functionality is "out of the box" available. NOT about whether it's beyond the scope of people (no matter which people are the subject of the discussion)." It works out of the box! Either you can't read, or you don't believe it. "This is a point you brought up in the first place. About wanting something to function out of the box." It does!!!! "Since no one who manufacturers for Sprint places any kind of "phone as modem" use claim on their materials, this isn't something would get included as deserving to work that way." Are you high or just stupid? There are two phones that have EXACTLY this in their materials. And it works beuatifully I might add. Set up DUN via Bluetooth, bam, you're surfing the net. Takes 3 maybe 4 minutes. No additional purchase necessary as long as you have a blutooth capable laptop. "It doesn't matter that it's in fact easy to do. It doesn't matter that's been done for three years (more if you count circuit-switched data, which I don't). What matters is that you have no right to it because no one making these phones is including this in the materials available with phones sold for Sprint service." Yes they do!!!!!!! "That's the point. The point YOU RAISED IN THE FIRST PLACE. When you can stick to your own conversations, then I'll reconsider. Until then, you're worthy of nothing but being ignored. " You said that in the first paragraph of this post before you carried on with a 3 paragraph reply. Is that the type of "sticking to my own conversations" you are talking about there Mr. Consistency? > It works out of the box! Either you can't read, or you don't believe > it. Since you're now back on subject, I'll respond. No, actually, it doesn't. You have to purchase additional hardware. The data cable. You need drivers that are not provided in-box. All of which may be easy to obtain, but that's still not out-of-the-box functionality. Which, again, was the point of my response. You said you expected it to work out of the box. It doesn't, even if it's not hard to achieve afterwards. Thus, it's not a relevant point to the *original* discussion, which was about whether Sprint supports this or not. > There are two phones that have EXACTLY this in their materials. And yet you won't list them. Why is that again? If it's in the advertising, or in the manual, you can BET that Sprint has read it. So what makes you think it's such an all-fired secret? Perhaps because it's NOT in the phones' materials, but in third party ones? Sure seems so, based on your baseless reticence. SignatureRØß O/Siris -+- A thing moderately good is not so good as it ought to be. Moderation in temper is always a virtue, but moderation in principle is always a vice. +Thomas Paine, "The Rights of Man", 1792+ >Since you're now back on subject, I'll respond. You also responded when you declared me off subject. You'll respond when I tell you to. >No, actually, it doesn't. You have to purchase additional hardware. The data cable. >You need drivers that are not provided in-box. Why do you assume that one needs a data cable to use a phone as a modem through DUN? >All of which may be easy to obtain, but that's still not out-of-the-box >functionality. If you have a bluetooth enable phone, and a blutoothe enabled laptop, it indeed works straight out-of-the-box. >Which, again, was the point of my response. Which was erroneous. >You said you expected it to work out of the box. It does. >It doesn't, even if it's not hard to achieve afterwards. It does. In roughly three minutes. >Thus, it's not a relevant point to the *original* discussion, which was about whether >Sprint supports this or not. Sprint doesn't "support" anything IMHO, beyond "remove the battery". >And yet you won't list them. Why is that again? 1) To see if you REALLY don't realize they exist or if you are just pretending (hopefully the latter for crying out loud). 2) I personally don't dig people who use them as a modem without the appropriate data plan. They saturate the network for those of us that want to use the Palm/PDA data. People tend to abuse such things, so I would prefer it not coming up in a Google Groups search. If you don't believe they exist, then those who are reading this that know that they do might question your supposed authority on other issues. If you were Tier 2 support, frankly it supports what I believed long ago. "Support" = "Remove the battery" > If it's in the advertising, or in the manual, you can BET that Sprint has read it. So >what makes you think it's such an all-fired secret? I never said it was. I know lots of people who use it. But Sprint doesn't know that Treo 300/600's have non-removable batteries, so I doubt they know which phones come out of the box with Bluetooth dialup DUN either. Sprint reps know little to nothing about the handsets they sell. >Perhaps because it's NOT in the phones' materials, but in third party >ones? Sure seems so, based on your baseless reticence. I OWN a phone where it walks you through step by step how to set up the DUN via Bluetooth right in the manual. Right in the Manual with a Sprint logo in the cover. I do not use it for this purpose, but it's right there in black and white. So much for "baseless reticence". You are just ignorant of the products the Sprint is selling. Never ascribe to malice on the part of others that can be explained through your own ignorance. > 1) To see if you REALLY don't realize they exist or if you are just > pretending (hopefully the latter for crying out loud). You made the claim. Back it up with proof. Where is it listed in the materials? You CLAIM two phones list it. Which two? That seems to be something beyond your ken. When one makes a claim, one is expected to be able to provide the proof to back it up. So back up the claim you're making: that at least two phones list use as a modem in their materials. SignatureRØß O/Siris -+- A thing moderately good is not so good as it ought to be. Moderation in temper is always a virtue, but moderation in principle is always a vice. +Thomas Paine, "The Rights of Man", 1792+ >You made the claim. Back it up with proof. Where is it listed in the >materials? You CLAIM two phones list it. Which two? Oh heck, if you are going to call me a liar, let's put our money where are mouths are this time instead of just swinging our dicks calling each other's bluff. It is so anti-climactic to prove someone wrong on Usenet. I never made a thin dime from it, and it's forgotten as soon as the next flameworthy thread is started. Therefore, let's not do that. Instead, let's wager $10,000. I will scan the manual pages of my phone (with "Sprint" prominently displayed on the cover of the manual) where it walks you through step by step how to set up DUN though Bluetooth ... namely the chapter where it says "Using Wireless Modem". I will also send you the manual to keep. We can use one of the online escrow services. I want something tangible out of being right in these little pissing contests with you. Let's deal with this like men with the courage to stand behind our statements, and be duly compensated for accuracy. Is that acceptable to you? >So back up the claim you're making: that at least two phones list use as >a modem in their materials. I agree that it is time to put up or shut up. So let's get this on the road. Are you in for 10 large? >> You made the claim. Back it up with proof. Where is it listed in >> the materials? You CLAIM two phones list it. Which two? > Oh heck, if you are going to call me a liar, let's put our money where > are mouths are this time instead of just swinging our dicks calling > each other's bluff. Rob's been here a lot longer than you have, and he's provided extremely helpful information here -- for everybody --- for a number of years. So, Mr. "Swinging our dicks" (my, what a classy phrase), do we have just a testosterone problem here? Why don't you just say what the two phones the two phones are and leave it at that? Signatureda ~~ >Rob's been here a lot longer than you have, and he's provided extremely >helpful information here -- for everybody --- for a number of years. >So, Mr. "Swinging our dicks" (my, what a classy phrase), do we have just >a testosterone problem here? "For everybody"? You've overdone it a bit, no? Oh I have been here for about as long as Rob has and I know that Rob has his fans and an equal amount of people that don't like him ... much like everyone has such people online. He has provided some good information, he has at times defended the indefensible and blamed the customer. But I don't know whatsoever this has anything at all to do with the issue at hand. >Why don't you just say what the two phones the two phones are and leave >it at that? Because I would rather post the two phones and get $10,000. Wouldn't you? > Because I would rather post the two phones and get $10,000. > > Wouldn't you? Actually, because you don't have the proof you claim to have. As usual. SignatureRØß O/Siris -+- A thing moderately good is not so good as it ought to be. Moderation in temper is always a virtue, but moderation in principle is always a vice. +Thomas Paine, "The Rights of Man", 1792+ >Actually, because you don't have the proof you claim to have. Then collect your $10,000 if I cannot! Are you dodging the wager? If you are that confiden that I have no proof, then good gracious man, take your free money! If I can't produce, you get paid. Why bother arguing on a Usenet thread when you can paid if I cannot product proof? Is $10,000 not enough? Is it chump change for you? Fine, then. Name your wager. Come on, man. No more bluffing. Show us all how confident you are in your assertions. Talk is cheap. >As usual. As usual? We have NEVER made a wager before. Are you going to collect your cash, or front? There are two escrows I could have lined up within 6 hours. Say the word, and I don't produce proof within 1 day (giving Usenet propogation due time), simply take your cash. If you thought you were right, why would you not do this? > Are you dodging the wager? Only as much so as you're dodging the truth. There is no phone sold by Sprint that lists supporting the use as a modem in its user manual. SignatureRØß O/Siris -+- A thing moderately good is not so good as it ought to be. Moderation in temper is always a virtue, but moderation in principle is always a vice. +Thomas Paine, "The Rights of Man", 1792+ >Only as much so as you're dodging the truth. I'm backing my claims up with $10,000. What are you backing your up with? >There is no phone sold by Sprint that lists supporting the use as a >modem in its user manual. Then put your money up an collect $10,000 !!!!! Why on earth would you not take the money, keep it, or donate it to a worthy cause if you honestly beelive this. Take your free money! I can't produce the manual within 24 hours of escrow, the money's yours. Come and get it. Thank goodness we are still on, because I was worried that you had backed out. I have an escrow company picked, I need you to formaly accept, though. Come and collect your $10,000 on my untruthfulness. Should be easy money for you. Enough yapping, let's put the money down. You might as well get paid for being right. >> You made the claim. Back it up with proof. Where is it listed in >> the materials? You CLAIM two phones list it. Which two? [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Instead, let's wager $10,000. OK, I assume most people here are aware of the LG PM-325, and that it contains Bluetooth as well as the DUN profile. Some might remember the limited-release Sony Ericsson T608 that offered it as well. But besides those two phones--and obviously not counting PDA phones--I know of no other SPCS phone that offers Bluetooth DUN capability out-of-box. So besides the LG, what other phone currently being sold does offer this? Granted, my (new) Treo 650's manual clearly describes setting up a Bluetooth DUN connection (the manual even provides additional troubleshooting help). But I don't really consider the Treo a regular phone. So, can I at least get $5K? SignatureMike >So, can I at least get $5K? Absolutely. But you don't get to "exclude" types of phones (ie. no smart phone, pda's,or what have you). That is silly. Why not just exclude every type of phone that doesn't have DUN built in to ensure a victory? The basic $99 plastic phones don't have it, but there arem indeed, phones that do. And with the discounts, they are not terribly expensive. And even the $99 phones now have web browsers (a $49 has Netfront on it!!!) and PIM managers ... so those are, in effect, PDA's and smartphones now. Albiet lessor ones. No exclusions. We are talking any phone sold by Sprint to consumers in which they can have DUN straight out of the box with no additional purchases. And chatpers in the Sprint-branded material telling you exactly how to do this. And I will gladly kick you in for 5 large if you are still interested. 5 from you, 10 from Rob ... $15K for two stinking manual scans. Heck, if either of you would like to make it more, I will gladly accomodate. Come on guys, let's do a Usenet first, let's make history .... people actually backing up what they say with something tangible. I'm willing. Are you? Is Rob? (I don't think Rob will because I don't find him to be a man of conviction in his beliefs, but would be thrilled to have him prove me wrong) >> So, can I at least get $5K? > > Absolutely. But you don't get to "exclude" types of phones (ie. no > smart phone, pda's,or what have you). That is silly. Why not just > exclude every type of phone that doesn't have DUN built in to ensure a > victory? Huh? I thought I could get $5K for revealing at least one of the phones; not by excluding one. But if we're gonna count the Treo 650 too, shouldn't I get the whole enchilada? Well, since I ain't scanning my Treo's colossal *356 page* printed manual (all in English!), a burrito from Del Taco will suffice. SignatureMike "Huh? I thought I could get $5K for revealing at least one of the phones; " We have to see if Rob accepts first. "But if we're gonna count the Treo 650 too, shouldn't I get the whole enchilada?" Don't give answers before a bet is accepted, and don't spoil my wager with Rob. He claims there are none. If you want contrary action to your POV, that comes from Rob. I know the phones exist. "Well, since I ain't scanning my Treo's colossal *356 page* printed manual (all in English!), a burrito from Del Taco will suffice. " Maybe Rob will agree to that, but I would prefer to put his expertise and accusations to a higher level of proof than a Del Taco burrito. You take the burrito, I'll take the 10K. Why has he not agreed to the dang wager yet? Maybe he's busy preparing the account to fund escrow. Maybe he's so wealthy that he is preparing a higher counter-offer. Well, have to see. Uh, Rob? How are we progressing on that 10 grand? How about now, Rob? Any progress on the money? There is 10 large with your name on it, just waiting to collect when you prove I can't produce what I claim I can. If you don't need it personally, you can donate it to charity. Don't let this sure thing pass you by. We can make it 50K if you would like. Come on. man. Hurry up while the offer is on the table. The opporunity for free money like this doesn't come along every day. Yo' Rob, how are we coming on that cash? You didn't find those phones on your own did you? No, I wouldn't expect you to be man enough to admit that you were wrong. Even though that is clearly the case. > Come on guys, let's do a Usenet first, The only "Usenet first" waiting to happen here is for you to back up your claims with proof. None so far. As expected. SignatureRØß O/Siris -+- A thing moderately good is not so good as it ought to be. Moderation in temper is always a virtue, but moderation in principle is always a vice. +Thomas Paine, "The Rights of Man", 1792+ |
Enable EMail Alerts
Start New Thread
Reply to this Message