[UPDATE]Motorola Olympus shows up on camera....again.

[2005CTS]

How is that arrogant? You can't have it both ways, you want the Ferrari of phones, but you want to run 87 octane in it...... It doesn't make sense.

It wasn't arrogant to say you didn't understand...but to imply that people should go to cricket or some other third rate carrier just because they don't want to pay extra for tiered LTE data plans...that was the arrogant part.

Many parts of the country will not have full LTE coverage for another couple of years - but still those folks want a high end phone - with best available hardware for their existing 3G networks. As we have seen resently...better hardware makes surfing on a 3G network faster and more enjoyable.

So it is simple. Many won't have LTE coverage for a while, Some will have spotty coverage initially and then there are those that because of the first two reasons...don't want to pay an extra $10.00 month for something that is not consistently rolled out across the country...but they still want a fast powerful phone that they can browset the internet, play games and use their apps on.

So - if you don't understand...fine. But don't be arrogant about where they should go...because they aren't good enough to be on your network.

 

[rybnik]

I don't understand at all people who want it to ship without LTE supprt.... "I don't want to pay more".....

Get Cricket or Boost or whatever if you "don't want to pay more". A lot of people want the best tech possible, not always the "cheapest". I mean look how many Android and iPhone users there are, if they all wanted cheaper they'd all be Nokia users.

Sent from my Droid using DroidForums App

Excuse me but that is a bit of an arrogant statement. Remember that LTE wont even be fully rolled out til 2013. I'm sure the people who don't have LTE coverage won't want to be forced to shell out for the extra cost when they can't even enjoy the benefits. That is not at all fair, yet it is already how Sprint works...I don't want Verizon to follow suit.

How is that arrogant? You can't have it both ways, you want the Ferrari of phones, but you want to run 87 octane in it...... It doesn't make sense.

Your analogy is all off. The Ferrari can only RUN 87 octane (we are talking only about people stuck in non-LTE areas). So, why should someone on Verizon be penalized 10+dollars per month in service charges when they can't even use those services--Meanwhile, were they an AT&T subscriber they would get the exact same phone without the penalty.

 

[rybnik]

How is that arrogant? You can't have it both ways, you want the Ferrari of phones, but you want to run 87 octane in it...... It doesn't make sense.

It wasn't arrogant to say you didn't understand...but to imply that people should go to cricket or some other third rate carrier just because they don't want to pay extra for tiered LTE data plans...that was the arrogant part.

Many parts of the country will not have full LTE coverage for another couple of years - but still those folks want a high end phone - with best available hardware for their existing 3G networks. As we have seen resently...better hardware makes surfing on a 3G network faster and more enjoyable.

So it is simple. Many won't have LTE coverage for a while, Some will have spotty coverage initially and then there are those that because of the first two reasons...don't want to pay an extra $10.00 month for something that is not consistently rolled out across the country...but they still want a fast powerful phone that they can browset the internet, play games and use their apps on.

So - if you don't understand...fine. But don't be arrogant about where they should go...because they aren't good enough to be on your network.

Thank you, you understand exactly what I was saying.

 

[UNC]

Excuse me but that is a bit of an arrogant statement. Remember that LTE wont even be fully rolled out til 2013. I'm sure the people who don't have LTE coverage won't want to be forced to shell out for the extra cost when they can't even enjoy the benefits. That is not at all fair, yet it is already how Sprint works...I don't want Verizon to follow suit.

How is that arrogant? You can't have it both ways, you want the Ferrari of phones, but you want to run 87 octane in it...... It doesn't make sense.

Your analogy is all off. The Ferrari can only RUN 87 octane (we are talking only about people stuck in non-LTE areas). So, why should someone on Verizon be penalized 10+dollars per month in service charges when they can't even use those services--Meanwhile, were they an AT&T subscriber they would get the exact same phone without the penalty.

No, my analogy is correct.
I could even go further.

 

[joker402]

And we dont know if they are even going to charge a premium for LTE in areas that wont have LTE untill a later date.

For all we know you can by an LTE phone and block LTE and only use the 3G part. (not likely but you get the poing)

 

[jaycemiskel]

While it may suck to have to pay extra for an lte phone, think about it from Verizon and the manufacturers stand point. Why have two phones with the only difference being one radio? That would be a waste, so they made it lte capable. However, Verizon could just give customers the option of not having an lte sim card and not paying extra. Of course, Verizon is all about the green so that's not gonna happen.

Sent from my Droid using Tapatalk

 

[jaycemiskel]

And we dont know if they are even going to charge a premium for LTE in areas that wont have LTE untill a later date.

For all we know you can by an LTE phone and block LTE and only use the 3G part. (not likely but you get the poing)

Someone over in the hd incredible forum who has a source on the inside said that Verizon is planning on charging you whether it's available or not.

Sent from my Droid using Tapatalk

 

[cereal killer]

Nobody should be getting up in arms about being forced to pay for LTE just yet. There is no reliable info out on that just yet. No need to fight over something that is not even happening right now.

When that info comes available then argue about it or not : )

edit: just to clarify I'm talking about paying for LTE on an LTE capable phone when it's not in your area. Remember they WILL still work over the 3G network.

 

[Preach2k]

Excuse me but that is a bit of an arrogant statement. Remember that LTE wont even be fully rolled out til 2013. I'm sure the people who don't have LTE coverage won't want to be forced to shell out for the extra cost when they can't even enjoy the benefits. That is not at all fair, yet it is already how Sprint works...I don't want Verizon to follow suit.

How is that arrogant? You can't have it both ways, you want the Ferrari of phones, but you want to run 87 octane in it...... It doesn't make sense.

Your analogy is all off. The Ferrari can only RUN 87 octane (we are talking only about people stuck in non-LTE areas). So, why should someone on Verizon be penalized 10+dollars per month in service charges when they can't even use those services--Meanwhile, were they an AT&T subscriber they would get the exact same phone without the penalty.

Where did you read that you will not be charged on AT&T? Post the Link please...

 

[jaycemiskel]

How is that arrogant? You can't have it both ways, you want the Ferrari of phones, but you want to run 87 octane in it...... It doesn't make sense.

Your analogy is all off. The Ferrari can only RUN 87 octane (we are talking only about people stuck in non-LTE areas). So, why should someone on Verizon be penalized 10+dollars per month in service charges when they can't even use those services--Meanwhile, were they an AT&T subscriber they would get the exact same phone without the penalty.

Where did you read that you will not be charged on AT&T? Post the Link please...

The at&t version of the phone won't be lte so they can't charge for it....

Sent from my Droid using Tapatalk

 

[Preach2k]

Your analogy is all off. The Ferrari can only RUN 87 octane (we are talking only about people stuck in non-LTE areas). So, why should someone on Verizon be penalized 10+dollars per month in service charges when they can't even use those services--Meanwhile, were they an AT&T subscriber they would get the exact same phone without the penalty.

Where did you read that you will not be charged on AT&T? Post the Link please...

The at&t version of the phone won't be lte so they can't charge for it....

Sent from my Droid using Tapatalk

For some reason I thought that AT&T had 4G already. I guess because of the iphone 4G.

But they are getting 4G in 2011.

 

[2005CTS]

Where did you read that you will not be charged on AT&T? Post the Link please...

The at&t version of the phone won't be lte so they can't charge for it....

Sent from my Droid using Tapatalk

For some reason I thought that AT&T had 4G already. I guess because of the iphone 4G.

But they are getting 4G in 2011.

Lots of people call it the iPhone 4G...but the technical name is iPhone4 - as in the 4th generation iPhone.

 

[joker402]

And we dont know if they are even going to charge a premium for LTE in areas that wont have LTE untill a later date.

For all we know you can by an LTE phone and block LTE and only use the 3G part. (not likely but you get the poing)

Someone over in the hd incredible forum who has a source on the inside said that Verizon is planning on charging you whether it's available or not.

Sent from my Droid using Tapatalk

yea and IT showed me the iphone for verizon today when i clocked in

I havent seen anything or heard anything from with in yet so untill something is leaked with a creditable source that insider tip from the HD Inc forums is just a rumor that needs to be taken with a grain of salt.

 

[jaycemiskel]

Yeah I take it with a grain of salt, but seriously, Verizon is money hungry. If Sprint is charging for it you can just about bet that Verizon will too.

Sent from my Droid using Tapatalk

 

[2005CTS]

My theory about the Motorola Olympus is that AT&T knows when Apple is going to release the iPhone to VZW...so AT&T will try and counter the announcement of the iPhone on VZW with a big announcement of the first dual core phone on AT&T. I see the Olympus as AT&T's play to keep their name in the news and grab some folks that might be tempted to follow the iPhone to verizon.

With the Nexus S being released last week - we have a small window of time for the iPhone4 and Olympus to be announced prior to the end of the year. They will be the last big three all 3G high end smart phones of 2010 - the Nexus S, Olympus and VZW iPhone4.

Bring it on!!!