 |
 | 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 / Verizon / January 2004Verizon cost
I have Verizon DSL for my home and found it so good and lo in cost I thought I would check their Cell service. To my suprise I found the Verizon cost about %100 higher than my T-Mobile service for the same service level. Its to bad they are so far out of line with cost. T-Mobile has <50% of the coverage that VZW has. You get what you pay for.... Costs are in-line. > I have Verizon DSL for my home and found it so good and lo in cost I > thought I would check their Cell service. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Its to bad they are so far out of line with cost. > > I have Verizon DSL for my home and found it so good and lo in cost I > > thought I would check their Cell service. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > > > Its to bad they are so far out of line with cost. If you can get internet service over cable in your area, compare the cost of Verizon DSL to cable modem on a bandwidth per dollar basis. In most cases it is not cheaper. Think of the higher Verizon Wireless cost as insurance that the phone will work in more areas. > > > I have Verizon DSL for my home and found it so good and lo in cost I > > > thought I would check their Cell service. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > it is not cheaper. Think of the higher Verizon Wireless cost as insurance > that the phone will work in more areas. The problem with your logic is that most people generally have no need for the higher bandwidth. I see you're on Optimum Online so of course you're going to say that cable is better. But for the majority of users, they are happy to pay $15-20 less and get a reasonable throughput vs. the possibility of higher bandwidth using cable. If you're within 12k feet of your central office, you can get 1.5mbps service from Verizon DSL. Yes, it's slow upload, but once again, most people don't really need better. It makes little sense to pay an extra $20 a month for a 600 minute plan when the 400 minute plan will meet your needs just fine. I consider DSL vs cable the same thing. Bill >> If you can get internet service over cable in your area, compare the cost of >> Verizon DSL to cable modem on a bandwidth per dollar basis. In most cases >> it is not cheaper. Think of the higher Verizon Wireless cost as insurance >> that the phone will work in more areas. > The problem with your logic is that most people generally have > no need for the higher bandwidth. That is true. As one who downloads, surfs, reads newsgroups and video chats a lot, I want the higher bandwidth.and am willing to pay for it. > I see you're on Optimum Online > so of course you're going to say that cable is better. No, I did not say cable is better. I said "compare the cost of Verizon DSL to cable modem on a bandwidth per dollar basis. In most cases it is not cheaper." For seveal months I DID have DSL and cable at the same time for a test, though. The cable (Time Warner RoadRunner of NYC) was twice as fast and many times more reliable than Verizon DSL. The extra speed pushed me towards cable... the reliability sealed the deal. Hopefully Verizon DSL is better now. > Yes, it's [DSL] slow > upload, but once again, most people don't really need better. You speak the truth. For Joe or Jane Doe who just look at 5 e-mails a day, don't download music, don't read newsgroups, don't look at videos of current news events, etc., I say stick to dial-up. They can get that for between $0 and $10 per month. Even a better deal than your DSL. Yes, I HAVE recommended that to certain clients. Disclaimer: it makes almost no sense to put in a dedicated phone line just for internet use. If you are going to go through that expense, put the money towards broadband. Any broadband. If you need the line for faxing, too, ignore the last disclaimer. > It makes little sense to pay an extra $20 a month for a 600 > minute plan when the 400 minute plan will meet your needs just > fine. I can't argue with that. > I consider DSL vs cable the same thing. Ok. Your opinion has a certain logic behind it, but so does mine. I think you are reading more into my original reply than I actually said. > I have Verizon DSL for my home and found it so good and lo in cost I > thought I would check their Cell service. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Its to bad they are so far out of line with cost. Yeah, unlike Verizon DSL, which is easily the price leader, Verizon Wireless is definitely not cheap. But as the other poster said, they get away with it because their signal quality is better than the rest. They're in no way related. Bill AT&T has 600 minutes for $39.99, but I heard customers get a lot of dropped calls. I think there phone choices are better though. AT&T still has the Motorola v60. Bob > > I have Verizon DSL for my home and found it so good and lo in cost I > > thought I would check their Cell service. [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > Bill > I have Verizon DSL for my home and found it so good and lo in cost I > thought I would check their Cell service. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Its to bad they are so far out of line with cost. It certainly a case of you get what you pay for. Tmobile's coverage in most areas is nowhere near that of other carriers... > I have Verizon DSL for my home and found it so good and lo in cost I > thought I would check their Cell service. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Its to bad they are so far out of line with cost. As stated you get what you pay for. T Mobile is very limited in coverage. FWIW, Verizon (DSL) and Verizon Wireless are two different companies. I have heard a lot of disgruntled people accuse T-Mobile of limited coverage, poor service but in my travels around the country (I drive some 65,000 miles each year) I have had superior coverage both GPRS and GSM . I let my actual experience set my option. As for there being two separate Verizons I called them and they were not aware of any other companies doing business under the Verizon name. > > I have Verizon DSL for my home and found it so good and lo in cost I > > thought I would check their Cell service. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > FWIW, Verizon (DSL) and Verizon Wireless are two different companies. > As for there being two separate Verizons I called them and they were not > aware of any other companies doing business under the Verizon name. You just have to be a bit more accurate... The cellular provider company is called Verizon Wireless. The wireline conglomeration is called Verizon Communications (I think). It may be broken down into Verizon Delaware Inc., Verizon Hawaii Inc., etc. They are separate companies. They do have different names. And yes, its is true that there is no other company doing business under the name used by the wireline company. -Quick > I have heard a lot of disgruntled people accuse T-Mobile of limited > coverage, poor service but in my travels around the country (I drive some > 65,000 miles each year) I have had superior coverage both GPRS and GSM . I > let my actual experience set my option. > As for there being two separate Verizons I called them and they were not > aware of any other companies doing business under the Verizon name. Technically, Verizon Wireless *is* a separate company, though. Verizon, the parent company, was formed by Bell Atlantic and GTE when they merged. Their wireless divisions formed Verizon Wireless as a joint venture with British wireless giant Vodafone plc. Verizon is the majority owner of Verizon Wireless, but is not the *only* owner.  SignatureJustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, Apple Valley, CA Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / sjsobol@JustThe.net PGP: C57E 8B25 F994 D6D0 5F6B B961 EA08 9410 E3AE 35ED > > I have heard a lot of disgruntled people accuse T-Mobile of limited > > coverage, poor service but in my travels around the country (I drive some [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > venture with British wireless giant Vodafone plc. Verizon is the majority > owner of Verizon Wireless, but is not the *only* owner. Here we go again- consider these three points: - All of VZW financials are included in Verizon's financial reports to the SEC, not 60%. - Vodafone only reports revenue received from VZW, which is probably represented as a line item on VZ's financials (although I've never been bored enough to look for it). - Vodafone has absolutely no voice in the day-to-day business affairs of VZW- something they have been pretty vocal about. From a truly financial perspective, it appears that Vodafone is an investor in one of VZ's divisions. And yes, I realize there is a partnership agreement in place between the two, but VZW is run and reported as if it is a division of Verizon. > > > I have heard a lot of disgruntled people accuse T-Mobile of limited > > > coverage, poor service but in my travels around the country (I drive [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > agreement in place between the two, but VZW is run and reported as if it is > a division of Verizon. That was the reply I received from investors services. > > I have Verizon DSL for my home and found it so good and lo in cost I > > thought I would check their Cell service. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > FWIW, Verizon (DSL) and Verizon Wireless are two different companies. Yes, I agree that my verizon bill is higher, but I think's that it may be because when I try to make a call, regardless if almost anywhere I am, the damn thing works---it makes the call, and then, they charge me for the minutes I use----Some time ago, I had another carrier, could make a call except in a very limited area, but since i never got to use it much, the bill was very reasonable. Do you think there might be a relationship here?? > I have Verizon DSL for my home and found it so good and lo in cost I > thought I would check their Cell service. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Its to bad they are so far out of line with cost. You get what you pay for. They have never tried to compete on price, and they don't have to. With regards to network quality, they're extremely solid... SignatureJustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, Apple Valley, CA Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / sjsobol@JustThe.net PGP: C57E 8B25 F994 D6D0 5F6B B961 EA08 9410 E3AE 35ED |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.