Advice on iPhone for friend

[Patty Winter]

A friend of mine currently has a flip phone, but she'd like to get
a smartphone so that she can use Lyft and Uber and take photos. The
battery in her current phone is on its way out, so she'll either
need to buy a new phone soon or get a new battery for the flip phone
to tide her over for a while.

She's interested in an iPhone, which is good because her daughter,
her son-in-law, and I all have iPhones and therefore could help her
learn about it. Also, she has an iMac, so she's accustomed to Apple's
interfaces.

Both Verizon (her current provider) and AT&T (her Internet and home
phone provider) offer iPhones, of course. AT&T has the iPhone 6,
while Verizon starts with a 6S. She may need to go with Verizon
because she thinks that her daughter has had some reception problems
with AT&T at her house. On the other hand, maybe she's using a lower-
grade voice network with the flip phone and will experience similar
problems with 4G LTE on Verizon; any theories on that?

At this point, I'm wondering whether to suggest that she go ahead and
get an iPhone 6, or whether she should get a replacement battery for
her current phone and wait for prices to drop after the iPhone 8 comes
out. The latter is what her SIL is recommending. She certainly doesn't
need the latest whiz-bang features, so I'm hesitant to recommend an
iPhone 7, even though that would have a longer "shelf life."

Any thoughts on the best way to proceed in this situation?


Thanks,

Patty

[Chris]

Take her to an Apple store or similar to test one out or lend her one of
yours. I'd say she may find a 6 to be a big step up. She may find the
smaller size of an SE to be a better fit.

[Wilf]

I agree an SE might be the best bet, not only because of size but also
in terms of price.

It's also really very sensible that she consider an iPhone rather than
something else if her family all have Apple devices. It makes it so
much easier when advice and help are needed etc. I know this from
experience ... my elderly father-in-law was going to get a Android
device but we persuaded him to buy Apple since we all have Apple phones
and iPads and would not be able to help him so easily if he had problems
with Android - that was a very good move as he always has problems or
needs advice on his device!!!!!

--
Wilf

[nospam]

In article <odhgu1$6f7$1...@dont-email.me>, Patty Winter

<pat...@wintertime.com> wrote:

> A friend of mine currently has a flip phone, but she'd like to get
> a smartphone so that she can use Lyft and Uber and take photos.

stick with lyft.

> The
> battery in her current phone is on its way out, so she'll either
> need to buy a new phone soon or get a new battery for the flip phone
> to tide her over for a while.

the advantage of getting another flipper is they're *really* cheap
because nobody wants them.

> She's interested in an iPhone, which is good because her daughter,
> her son-in-law, and I all have iPhones and therefore could help her
> learn about it. Also, she has an iMac, so she's accustomed to Apple's
> interfaces.
>
> Both Verizon (her current provider) and AT&T (her Internet and home
> phone provider) offer iPhones, of course. AT&T has the iPhone 6,

no they don't. the iphone 6 was discontinued when the 7 came out.
anyone trying to sell a 6 as new is a scammer.

only the 7/7+, 6s/6s+ and se are listed:
<https://www.att.com/shop/wireless/devices/apple/iphone.html>

> while Verizon starts with a 6S.

they both have the 6s as well as the 7 and se.

> She may need to go with Verizon
> because she thinks that her daughter has had some reception problems
> with AT&T at her house. On the other hand, maybe she's using a lower-
> grade voice network with the flip phone and will experience similar
> problems with 4G LTE on Verizon; any theories on that?

also consider sprint & t-mobile or an mvno.

> At this point, I'm wondering whether to suggest that she go ahead and
> get an iPhone 6, or whether she should get a replacement battery for
> her current phone and wait for prices to drop after the iPhone 8 comes
> out. The latter is what her SIL is recommending. She certainly doesn't
> need the latest whiz-bang features, so I'm hesitant to recommend an
> iPhone 7, even though that would have a longer "shelf life."

the step up to a smartphone is whiz bang enough.

at this point, get either an iphone 7, 7+ or an se, depending on what
size device she prefers.

don't bother with a 6s and certainly not a 6 or earlier.

the next iphone is expected in september and the prices for the iphone
7 will drop $100 or so, which is about 2 months of service from one of
the major carriers. that's hardly worth waiting 6 months.

[philo]

My wife has an iPhone and loves it, but I bought an Android because it
was about 1/10th the price.

It does everything I need and the iPhone does not have any special
extras I feel that I need...

[nospam]

In article <odicuh$koh$2...@dont-email.me>, philo <ph...@privacy.net>
wrote:

>
> My wife has an iPhone and loves it, but I bought an Android because it
> was about 1/10th the price.

with 1/10th the specs, likely worse.

> It does everything I need and the iPhone does not have any special
> extras I feel that I need...

that's an entirely different matter.

[Jolly Roger]

On 2017-04-23, Patty Winter <pat...@wintertime.com> wrote:
> A friend of mine currently has a flip phone, but she'd like to get a
> smartphone so that she can use Lyft and Uber and take photos. The
> battery in her current phone is on its way out, so she'll either need
> to buy a new phone soon or get a new battery for the flip phone to
> tide her over for a while.
>
> She's interested in an iPhone, which is good because her daughter, her
> son-in-law, and I all have iPhones and therefore could help her learn
> about it. Also, she has an iMac, so she's accustomed to Apple's
> interfaces.
>
> Both Verizon (her current provider) and AT&T (her Internet and home
> phone provider) offer iPhones, of course. AT&T has the iPhone 6, while
> Verizon starts with a 6S.

Whoever told you that is incorrect. You can get the latest phone with
either service. If I were you I would strongly advise her to purchase
her iPhone from Apple directly rather than one of the carriers. Apple
will be more knowledgeable about her options, and will even help her get
data (contacts, etc) onto the new phone if needed. Carriers won't give
you the same service and may try to sell you an older model. And at an
It'd be a good idea for her to hold each model in her own hands to help
her decide which model is best for her. Don't forget the iPhone SE,
which appeals to many people who, like me, appreciate the small form
factor over larger, more cumbersome models.

> She may need to go with Verizon because she thinks that her daughter
> has had some reception problems with AT&T at her house. On the other
> hand, maybe she's using a lower- grade voice network with the flip
> phone and will experience similar problems with 4G LTE on Verizon; any
> theories on that?

It sounds like Verizon would be better for her. I've used both Verizon
and AT&T, and have had better coverage in multiple states with Verizon,
personally. You can find out what the coverage looks like for a given
area on their respective web sites:

<https://vzwmap.verizonwireless.com/dotcom/coveragelocator/>

<https://www.att.com/maps/wireless-coverage.html>

As far as other carriers go, I'd stay away from Sprint if simultaneous
voice and data is important (the ability to use internet-connected apps
while on a phone call - "hang on, I'll send that to you right now while
we are on the phone", "let me look up the store's hours", "here's a Maps
link" and so on), because Sprint hasn't supported that for many years,
while Verizon and AT&T have.

> At this point, I'm wondering whether to suggest that she go ahead and
> get an iPhone 6, or whether she should get a replacement battery for
> her current phone and wait for prices to drop after the iPhone 8 comes
> out. The latter is what her SIL is recommending. She certainly doesn't
> need the latest whiz-bang features, so I'm hesitant to recommend an
> iPhone 7, even though that would have a longer "shelf life."
>
> Any thoughts on the best way to proceed in this situation?

Rather than putting it off to wait for new models, I'd just get the
latest model that is available now. I'd definitely avoid getting an
older model unless money is a significant factor, in which case I'd
still recommend looking at the iPhone SE, since it's cheaper than the
larger models yet is fairly up to date in terms of the technologies
included.

--
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

[nospam]

In article <em40ig...@mid.individual.net>, Jolly Roger

<jolly...@pobox.com> wrote:

> As far as other carriers go, I'd stay away from Sprint if simultaneous
> voice and data is important (the ability to use internet-connected apps
> while on a phone call - "hang on, I'll send that to you right now while
> we are on the phone", "let me look up the store's hours", "here's a Maps
> link" and so on), because Sprint hasn't supported that for many years,
> while Verizon and AT&T have.

not true at all.

historically, cdma did not support both (*), nor could gsm (original
at&t iphone), however, 3g did.

with lte, it's not an issue. in other words, iphone 5 and later.

* later revisions of cdma could do simultaneous voice/data, but by that
time, lte was available so there was no point in deploying it.

[RS Wood]

Patty Winter wrote:

> She certainly doesn't
> need the latest whiz-bang features, so I'm hesitant to recommend an
> iPhone 7, even though that would have a longer "shelf life."

6SE

[nospam]

no such phone.

[Jolly Roger]

On 2017-04-23, nospam <nos...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> In article <em40ig...@mid.individual.net>, Jolly Roger
><jolly...@pobox.com> wrote:
>
>> As far as other carriers go, I'd stay away from Sprint if simultaneous
>> voice and data is important (the ability to use internet-connected apps
>> while on a phone call - "hang on, I'll send that to you right now while
>> we are on the phone", "let me look up the store's hours", "here's a Maps
>> link" and so on), because Sprint hasn't supported that for many years,
>> while Verizon and AT&T have.
>
> not true at all.

Boy... You'd better tell Sprint, and all of these people who report it's
not working for them!:

<https://community.sprint.com/t5/Complaint-Department/IPhone-6s-voice-and-data-simultaneously/m-p/71757>

<https://community.sprint.com/t5/iPhone-6-and-iPhone-6-Plus/iPhone-6-Simultaneous-Voice-and-Data/td-p/713449>

<https://www.reddit.com/r/Sprint/comments/52e8i1/simultaneous_voice_and_lte_data_when/>

> historically, cdma did not support both (*), nor could gsm (original
> at&t iphone), however, 3g did.
>
> with lte, it's not an issue. in other words, iphone 5 and later.
>
> * later revisions of cdma could do simultaneous voice/data, but by that
> time, lte was available so there was no point in deploying it.

Who to believe? Hmm...

<https://www.cnet.com/news/verizon-sprint-iphone-5-cant-do-voice-plus-data-on-4g-lte/>

[nospam]

In article <em43fc...@mid.individual.net>, Jolly Roger

<jolly...@pobox.com> wrote:

> >> As far as other carriers go, I'd stay away from Sprint if simultaneous
> >> voice and data is important (the ability to use internet-connected apps
> >> while on a phone call - "hang on, I'll send that to you right now while
> >> we are on the phone", "let me look up the store's hours", "here's a Maps
> >> link" and so on), because Sprint hasn't supported that for many years,
> >> while Verizon and AT&T have.
> >
> > not true at all.
>
> Boy... You'd better tell Sprint, and all of these people who report it's
> not working for them!:

that's actually an iphone limitation. some iphones lack two antennas
for both lte (data) and cdma/hspa (voice) to be used at the same time.
when used with 3g, it's not an issue. it's also not specific to sprint,
but any carrier with lte.

volte (voice over lte) solves that, but it is not yet fully deployed
everywhere and currently requires the same carrier on both ends.

[Jolly Roger]

On 2017-04-23, nospam <nos...@nospam.invalid> wrote:

> In article <em43fc...@mid.individual.net>, Jolly Roger
><jolly...@pobox.com> wrote:
>
>>>> As far as other carriers go, I'd stay away from Sprint if
>>>> simultaneous voice and data is important (the ability to use
>>>> internet-connected apps while on a phone call - "hang on, I'll
>>>> send that to you right now while we are on the phone", "let me
>>>> look up the store's hours", "here's a Maps link" and so on),
>>>> because Sprint hasn't supported that for many years, while Verizon
>>>> and AT&T have.
>>>
>>> not true at all.
>>
>> Boy... You'd better tell Sprint, and all of these people who report
>> it's not working for them!:
>

> that's actually an iphone limitation. blah blah blah

The only thing that matters to a real person in the end is that with
Sprint and iPhones you very often *cannot* do simultaneous voice and
data, which is precisely what I warned Patty about. It's definitely
something she and her friend should consider when making their carrier
decision.

[nospam]

In article <em441l...@mid.individual.net>, Jolly Roger

<jolly...@pobox.com> wrote:

>
> The only thing that matters to a real person in the end is that with
> Sprint and iPhones you very often *cannot* do simultaneous voice and
> data, which is precisely what I warned Patty about. It's definitely
> something she and her friend should consider when making their carrier
> decision.

it applies to all carriers, including verizon, t-mobile and at&t. it's
an issue with lte and the design of the phone itself.

<http://forums.androidcentral.com/samsung-galaxy-note-edge/478971-no-sim
ultaneous-voice-data-verizon.html>
Wouldn't surprise me. Every phone released on verizon since the Moto
X 2014 has not had simultaneous voice and data. Verizon is forcing
manufacturers to exclude the radios required for this because they
want to get everyone pushed to their VoLTE network. This includes the
new X, turbo, Sony Z3v, LG g3, and maybe others. Some have gotten the
VoLTE update, but most have not. Would not surprise me at all if vzw
forced Samsung to follow along.
...
You have to enable Advanced Calling in settings BUT if you have
ringback tones or Caller Id, it DISABLES those features. So you have
to choose which one you want. ??
...
It should be noted, however, that if you have advanced calling
enabled, your call is over the LTE network. Accordingly, if you move
into an area that has spotty LTE, or if your phone drops LTE (for
example, goes on 3G), you drop your call, believe it or not. Stated
another way, you can make calls ONLY when you are on a solid LTE
connection. Sounds crazy, but it's true.
...
Bought the Galaxy S6 yesterday. Tested it today. I'll be returning
it. The fact that if you start a call on 3G, and during that call you
will not have data (evenIfYouEndUpInAnLTEcoverageZone) until you hang
up....Is ridiculous!

advanced calling, or hd voice, is volte, and as i said, it's not fully
deployed everywhere and currently requires the same volte-capable
carrier on both sides. if you call a landline, no volte for you.

[Jolly Roger]

On 2017-04-23, nospam <nos...@nospam.invalid> wrote:

> In article <em441l...@mid.individual.net>, Jolly Roger
><jolly...@pobox.com> wrote:
>
>> The only thing that matters to a real person in the end is that with
>> Sprint and iPhones you very often *cannot* do simultaneous voice and
>> data, which is precisely what I warned Patty about. It's definitely
>> something she and her friend should consider when making their carrier
>> decision.
>

> it applies to all carriers, including verizon, t-mobile and at&t. blah
> blah blah

I'm on my Verizon iPhone SE at the moment, with no WiFi access, and I'm
accessing data over Verizon without issue. And I've never had an issue
doing so on Verizon. I'll take anecdotal real-world experience over your
BS any day.

[Jolly Roger]

On 2017-04-23, Jolly Roger <jolly...@pobox.com> wrote:
> On 2017-04-23, nospam <nos...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>> In article <em441l...@mid.individual.net>, Jolly Roger
>><jolly...@pobox.com> wrote:
>>
>>> The only thing that matters to a real person in the end is that with
>>> Sprint and iPhones you very often *cannot* do simultaneous voice and
>>> data, which is precisely what I warned Patty about. It's definitely
>>> something she and her friend should consider when making their carrier
>>> decision.
>>
>> it applies to all carriers, including verizon, t-mobile and at&t. blah
>> blah blah
>
> I'm on my Verizon iPhone SE at the moment, with no WiFi access, and I'm
> accessing data over Verizon without issue. And I've never had an issue
> doing so on Verizon.

(or AT&T, for that matter.)

[nospam]

In article <em455e...@mid.individual.net>, Jolly Roger

<jolly...@pobox.com> wrote:

> >> The only thing that matters to a real person in the end is that with
> >> Sprint and iPhones you very often *cannot* do simultaneous voice and
> >> data, which is precisely what I warned Patty about. It's definitely
> >> something she and her friend should consider when making their carrier
> >> decision.
> >
> > it applies to all carriers, including verizon, t-mobile and at&t. blah
> > blah blah
>
> I'm on my Verizon iPhone SE at the moment, with no WiFi access, and I'm
> accessing data over Verizon without issue. And I've never had an issue
> doing so on Verizon.

accessing data isn't the issue. it's data *and* voice at the same time,
which is also something few people do anyway, especially these days
where everyone texts.

> I'll take anecdotal real-world experience over your
> BS any day.

try actual specs of lte/hspa/cdma rather than anecdotes.

[Jolly Roger]

On 2017-04-23, nospam <nos...@nospam.invalid> wrote:

> In article <em455e...@mid.individual.net>, Jolly Roger
><jolly...@pobox.com> wrote:
>
>>>> The only thing that matters to a real person in the end is that
>>>> with Sprint and iPhones you very often *cannot* do simultaneous
>>>> voice and data, which is precisely what I warned Patty about. It's
>>>> definitely something she and her friend should consider when
>>>> making their carrier decision.
>>>
>>> it applies to all carriers, including verizon, t-mobile and at&t.
>>> blah blah blah
>>
>> I'm on my Verizon iPhone SE at the moment, with no WiFi access, and
>> I'm accessing data over Verizon without issue. And I've never had an
>> issue doing so on Verizon.
>
> accessing data isn't the issue. it's data *and* voice at the same time

I know exactly what the issue is since it was *I* who brought up
"simultaneous voice and data" to begin with. Duh. Naturally, when I said
"I'm on my Verizon iPhone SE at the moment", I meant I was on a phone
call at the time. You can pretend I meant something other than
simultaneous voice and data if you want, but you're only going to make
yourself look silly. I routinely make voice calls while accessing
cellular data on Verizon, and have done so on AT&T, with various iPhone
models, and without issue. Meanwhile I have known people and read forums
where others have said that with Sprint and an iPhone, simultaneous
voice and data was impossible. Real people don't care about specs; they
care about what actually works or doesn't work in the real world.

> which is also something few people do anyway

Utter nonsense. Some people do it *routinely*, including me. And if
Patty or her friend happen to want to do it, it definitely matters to
*them* even if it doesn't matter to *you*.

>> I'll take anecdotal real-world experience over your BS any day.
>
> try actual specs of lte/hspa/cdma rather than anecdotes.

Again, specs don't hold nearly as much weight with real people as real
world experience for good reason. What matters most is what a real
person in the real world is actually able to do; and it's been shown
time and again that Sprint has issues with simultaneous voice and data -
issues that often don't exist with Verizon of AT&T.

At any rate, it's clear you are here just to argue, and there's no
actual value to your silly argument. And Patty has enough information to
at least be warned about the potential for an issue here with Sprint,
which was my only goal. So you can go ahead and award yourself the "last
word" prize. I'm done with this line of discussion.

[nospam]

In article <em46h7...@mid.individual.net>, Jolly Roger

<jolly...@pobox.com> wrote:

>
> >> I'll take anecdotal real-world experience over your BS any day.
> >
> > try actual specs of lte/hspa/cdma rather than anecdotes.
>
> Again, specs don't hold nearly as much weight with real people as real
> world experience for good reason. What matters most is what a real
> person in the real world is actually able to do; and it's been shown
> time and again that Sprint has issues with simultaneous voice and data -
> issues that often don't exist with Verizon of AT&T.

all carriers have that issue because of how lte works.

lte is *only* data, regardless of carrier.

voice calls either uses cdma/hspa fallback (two radios at the same
time, some phones can and others cannot) or volte (voice over lte, not
available everywhere and both ends must support it).

i linked an example of verizon customers not being able to do
voice/data at the same time unless they enabled volte, which currently
only works with other verizon lte customers who also can do lte.

[JF Mezei]

On 2017-04-23 11:59, nospam wrote:

> historically, cdma did not support both (*), nor could gsm (original
> at&t iphone), however, 3g did.

GPRS and EDGE support simultaneous voice/data. the first generations
iPhones were a combination of iPhone being a new product and AT&T
telling Apple to not enable certain features. (tethering being a good
example of AT&T dictated limitation). All other phones supported
tethering at that time (using same APN as the phone's GPRS/HSPA link, so
undifferentiated and AT&T not able to bill for use of thethering).

Apple's implementation (and after that all others) allowed carriers to
use different APNs and authorize phone and tethering separately,
allowing subscription options to enable tethering.


One area where one has to consider is that Apple has valued battery
autonomy quite a bit. It delayed 3G and LTE by a year compared to peers
in order to get a chipset that gave reasonable battery autonomy. (first
generation smartphones with 3G and then LTE had dismal battery autonomy).

And the iPhone, despite having smaller batteries (capacity) have
signifi9cantly longer autonomy in real life than Android phones. And
that is a HUGE advantage for Apple even though it isn't something that
really shows up in specs (especially when you compare raw battery capacity).

[Jolly Roger]

On 2017-04-23, JF Mezei <jfmezei...@vaxination.ca> wrote:
>
> And the iPhone, despite having smaller batteries (capacity) have
> signifi9cantly longer autonomy in real life than Android phones. And
> that is a HUGE advantage for Apple even though it isn't something that
> really shows up in specs (especially when you compare raw battery capacity).

There's also resale value to consider. Like Macs, iPhones have pretty
good resale value, which you can use to offset the purchase of a new
model down the line.

[nospam]

In article <58fce643$0$42023$c3e8da3$3a1a...@news.astraweb.com>, JF

Mezei <jfmezei...@vaxination.ca> wrote:

>
> > historically, cdma did not support both (*), nor could gsm (original
> > at&t iphone), however, 3g did.
>
> GPRS and EDGE support simultaneous voice/data.

edge does not support simultaneous voice/data and gprs is too slow for
data at all.

> the first generations
> iPhones were a combination of iPhone being a new product and AT&T
> telling Apple to not enable certain features. (tethering being a good
> example of AT&T dictated limitation).

it was because shipping the phone had priority over adding features
that many people didn't use. the first iphone didn't have mms either.

> All other phones supported
> tethering at that time (using same APN as the phone's GPRS/HSPA link, so
> undifferentiated and AT&T not able to bill for use of thethering).

tethering is up to the carrier.

at&t didn't want it, particularly since their network buckled with all
of the iphone users using the phone normally.

> Apple's implementation (and after that all others) allowed carriers to
> use different APNs and authorize phone and tethering separately,
> allowing subscription options to enable tethering.

it has nothing to do with apns and they've *always* been able to
differentiate.

> One area where one has to consider is that Apple has valued battery
> autonomy quite a bit. It delayed 3G and LTE by a year compared to peers
> in order to get a chipset that gave reasonable battery autonomy. (first
> generation smartphones with 3G and then LTE had dismal battery autonomy).

needing a larger battery for lte is why android device makers started
making larger phones, which ended up catching on with customers.

> And the iPhone, despite having smaller batteries (capacity) have
> signifi9cantly longer autonomy in real life than Android phones. And
> that is a HUGE advantage for Apple even though it isn't something that
> really shows up in specs (especially when you compare raw battery capacity).

that's because ios has much better power management, something android
'o' supposedly addresses. better late than never.

[Patty Winter]

In article <odhuq0$l83$1...@gioia.aioe.org>, Wilf <wi...@replyto.newsgroup> wrote:
>On 23/04/2017 10:31 am, Chris wrote:

[snip]

>> Take her to an Apple store or similar to test one out or lend her one of
>> yours. I'd say she may find a 6 to be a big step up. She may find the
>> smaller size of an SE to be a better fit.
>
>I agree an SE might be the best bet, not only because of size but also
>in terms of price.

Yes, we'll certainly have her try out the different phone sizes before
she buys one.

I was hesitant about the SE because it sounds like a hybrid between
a 5 and a 6, so I thought it might get tossed into the officially
unsupported category sooner than the 6 models will.


Patty

[Patty Winter]

In article <230420170725102622%nos...@nospam.invalid>,

nospam <nos...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>In article <odhgu1$6f7$1...@dont-email.me>, Patty Winter
><pat...@wintertime.com> wrote:
>
>> The
>> battery in her current phone is on its way out, so she'll either
>> need to buy a new phone soon or get a new battery for the flip phone
>> to tide her over for a while.
>
>the advantage of getting another flipper is they're *really* cheap
>because nobody wants them.

But flip phones don't run apps such as Lyft and Uber, right? I had
an old-style cellphone that only had a very rudimentary web browser.

>> Both Verizon (her current provider) and AT&T (her Internet and home
>> phone provider) offer iPhones, of course. AT&T has the iPhone 6,
>
>no they don't. the iphone 6 was discontinued when the 7 came out.
>anyone trying to sell a 6 as new is a scammer.

LOL, then you must believe that AT&T are scammers:

https://www.att.com/shop/wireless/devices/smartphones.html
https://www.att.com/cellphones/iphone/iphone-6-prepaid.html

>only the 7/7+, 6s/6s+ and se are listed:
><https://www.att.com/shop/wireless/devices/apple/iphone.html>

First of all, the 6s *is* an iPhone 6 model. What makes you think
I was only talking about a specific model that doesn't have a suffix
rather than the entire family? Second, AT&T *does* still sell actual
"iPhone 6" phones, as noted in the URL above. They were even selling
iPhone 5 models until recently; I got mine less than a year ago.

>> while Verizon starts with a 6S.
>
>they both have the 6s as well as the 7 and se.

Of course they do, but as I mentioned, she doesn't need the latest
bells and whistles, so I don't see the use in her spending extra
for a 7. I just mentioned my concern about the SE in another post.

>the next iphone is expected in september and the prices for the iphone
>7 will drop $100 or so, which is about 2 months of service from one of
>the major carriers. that's hardly worth waiting 6 months.

Good point.


Patty

[Patty Winter]

In article <em40ig...@mid.individual.net>,

Jolly Roger <jolly...@pobox.com> wrote:
>On 2017-04-23, Patty Winter <pat...@wintertime.com> wrote:
>>
>> Both Verizon (her current provider) and AT&T (her Internet and home
>> phone provider) offer iPhones, of course. AT&T has the iPhone 6, while
>> Verizon starts with a 6S.
>
>Whoever told you that is incorrect. You can get the latest phone with
>either service.

Of course one can get an iPhone 7. I never said otherwise. But she
doesn't need one.

>If I were you I would strongly advise her to purchase
>her iPhone from Apple directly rather than one of the carriers. Apple
>will be more knowledgeable about her options, and will even help her get
>data (contacts, etc) onto the new phone if needed.

I assume you mean data from her iMac? I can't imagine that there's any
way to transfer data from her flip phone.

>Don't forget the iPhone SE,
>which appeals to many people who, like me, appreciate the small form
>factor over larger, more cumbersome models.

Yes, it's small and less expensive, but will it become obsolete sooner
than the 6 series phones?

>>She may need to go with Verizon
>>because she thinks that her daughter has had some reception problems
>>with AT&T at her house. On the other hand, maybe she's using a lower-
>>grade voice network with the flip phone and will experience similar
>>problems with 4G LTE on Verizon; any theories on that?
>
>It sounds like Verizon would be better for her. I've used both Verizon
>and AT&T, and have had better coverage in multiple states with Verizon,
>personally. You can find out what the coverage looks like for a given
>area on their respective web sites:
>
><https://vzwmap.verizonwireless.com/dotcom/coveragelocator/>
>
><https://www.att.com/maps/wireless-coverage.html>

Oh yes, I was zoomed in on both of those last night. They both claim
that she has full 4G LTE coverage at her house. Her daughter's experience
suggests otherwise, at least for AT&T. Is there any way of predicting
whether Verizon only seems better now because she isn't using it for 4G LTE?

>> Any thoughts on the best way to proceed in this situation?
>
>Rather than putting it off to wait for new models, I'd just get the
>latest model that is available now. I'd definitely avoid getting an
>older model unless money is a significant factor, in which case I'd
>still recommend looking at the iPhone SE, since it's cheaper than the
>larger models yet is fairly up to date in terms of the technologies
>included.

So the SE isn't likely to get obsoleted at the same time as the 5s? (That's
the plural "5," not "5ess.") I was concerned that it might.

She could easily afford a 7; I just don't see how it's worth it for
her except for the fact that Apple will be supporting it later than
a 6. Is that enough of a factor to warrant the extra $100 over a 6?


Patty

[nospam]

In article <odiq0a$ug1$1...@dont-email.me>, Patty Winter

<pat...@wintertime.com> wrote:

>
> I was hesitant about the SE because it sounds like a hybrid between
> a 5 and a 6, so I thought it might get tossed into the officially
> unsupported category sooner than the 6 models will.

the iphone se is an iphone 6s (a9 cpu) in an iphone 5s enclosure, with
the radios of a 6 (not as many lte bands as the 6s).

there are minor feature differences between a 6s and an se, such as the
se not having force touch and having a 1st gen touch id sensor. those
are certainly nice to have but not a huge issue if not there.

in other words, an iphone 6, with an older processor (a8), will lose
support *before* the se does.

apple dropping support is also not going to happen for several years
(the iphone 5 is about to lose support only because it's a 32 bit cpu)
so there's no point in worrying about it now and she'll more than
likely be wanting a new iphone before that happens anyway.

[nospam]

In article <odiqs7$ug1$2...@dont-email.me>, Patty Winter

<pat...@wintertime.com> wrote:

> >> The
> >> battery in her current phone is on its way out, so she'll either
> >> need to buy a new phone soon or get a new battery for the flip phone
> >> to tide her over for a while.
> >
> >the advantage of getting another flipper is they're *really* cheap
> >because nobody wants them.
>
> But flip phones don't run apps such as Lyft and Uber, right? I had
> an old-style cellphone that only had a very rudimentary web browser.

flippers can run primitive apps, but the point is that buying a
smartphone *just* for lyft may not be a cost effective solution.

and stay away from uber. there is no end to their fuckups. here's yet
another, where they tried to spoof apple engineers from detecting what
they were doing:
<https://9to5mac.com/2017/04/23/tim-cook-reportedly-threatened-to-remove-
uber-from-the-app-store-in-ceo-meeting/>

> >> Both Verizon (her current provider) and AT&T (her Internet and home
> >> phone provider) offer iPhones, of course. AT&T has the iPhone 6,
> >
> >no they don't. the iphone 6 was discontinued when the 7 came out.
> >anyone trying to sell a 6 as new is a scammer.
>
> LOL, then you must believe that AT&T are scammers:

they absolutely are.

> https://www.att.com/shop/wireless/devices/smartphones.html

only iphone 7/6s/se listed there, along with assorted recent android
phones. no iphone 6.

> https://www.att.com/cellphones/iphone/iphone-6-prepaid.html

that's prepaid, which is where carriers dump old or refurbished stock,
and $299 for a 6 is a ripoff anyway.

> >only the 7/7+, 6s/6s+ and se are listed:
> ><https://www.att.com/shop/wireless/devices/apple/iphone.html>
>
> First of all, the 6s *is* an iPhone 6 model.

no it isn't.

the iphone 6s is a *very* different phone than a 6, one with much
better specs, including a faster processor (a9), more memory (2gig),
more lte bands, force touch, 2nd gen touch id sensor (*much* faster),
'hey siri' on battery, optical stabilization for video and maybe more
stuff i don't remember. even the case is different, with a different
grade of aluminum.

> What makes you think
> I was only talking about a specific model that doesn't have a suffix
> rather than the entire family?

the suffix means it's a different model.

> Second, AT&T *does* still sell actual
> "iPhone 6" phones, as noted in the URL above. They were even selling
> iPhone 5 models until recently; I got mine less than a year ago.

customer returns and/or refurbished.

> >> while Verizon starts with a 6S.
> >
> >they both have the 6s as well as the 7 and se.
>
> Of course they do, but as I mentioned, she doesn't need the latest
> bells and whistles, so I don't see the use in her spending extra
> for a 7. I just mentioned my concern about the SE in another post.

your concern is erroneous. the se is basically a 6s in a 5s case and
will be supported *longer* than the 6 will (or they both get dropped at
the same time).

[nospam]

In article <odirfp$ug1$3...@dont-email.me>, Patty Winter

<pat...@wintertime.com> wrote:

>
> >If I were you I would strongly advise her to purchase
> >her iPhone from Apple directly rather than one of the carriers. Apple
> >will be more knowledgeable about her options, and will even help her get
> >data (contacts, etc) onto the new phone if needed.
>
> I assume you mean data from her iMac? I can't imagine that there's any
> way to transfer data from her flip phone.

nearly all flippers can have their data copied and transferred to
another phone (iphone, android or another flipper), and apple or the
carriers will even do it for you if you don't want to do it yourself.

> >Don't forget the iPhone SE,
> >which appeals to many people who, like me, appreciate the small form
> >factor over larger, more cumbersome models.
>
> Yes, it's small and less expensive, but will it become obsolete sooner
> than the 6 series phones?

no.

>
> She could easily afford a 7;

then get that. yolo.

> I just don't see how it's worth it for
> her except for the fact that Apple will be supporting it later than
> a 6. Is that enough of a factor to warrant the extra $100 over a 6?

there are many benefits to a 7, particularly the 7+ with the dual-lens
camera.

a difference of $100 is not a big deal. that's about 2, maybe 3 months
of monthly service fees (unless she uses an mvno).

[JF Mezei]

On 2017-04-23 12:42, nospam wrote:

> volte (voice over lte) solves that, but it is not yet fully deployed
> everywhere and currently requires the same carrier on both ends.

Since late last year, Rogers in Canada deployed "true" VoLTE service,
not just the "gimmick" that only works in certain cases.

when conencted over LTE, all calls, even to POTS destinations are done
on LTE, and you phone does not switch down to 3G like it used to.

There was a carrier setting update which enabled VoLTE for all calls.

This was transparent to customers.


I have to assume its "brother" AT&T in the USA (they use compatible
equipment) would have implemnented this, and Verizon would want this
implenented ASAP if they haven't already.

As for Sprint, it is not clear what their strategy is. If the nd game
consist of moving customers onto thye T-Mobile network when the 2 merge,
then there is less point in investing to upgrade the Sprint
infrastructure that would be shut down anyways.

[JF Mezei]

On 2017-04-23 12:56, nospam wrote:

> it applies to all carriers, including verizon, t-mobile and at&t. it's
> an issue with lte and the design of the phone itself.

iPhone has no problem doing data/voice on 3G at same time. In fact, it
was one of the marketing spiels for AT&T to gain customers when Verizon
couldn't do that even if it had the iPhone.

on GSM, voice/data has been possible since GPRS days on the same radio.

Without VoLTE, making phone calls requires the radio swicth to 3G
(UMTS/HSPA), but you can still do voice/data. But with Verizon, it needs
to switch from LTE to CDMA at which point voice/data wasn't possible.

[nospam]

In article <58fd0ae6$0$57915$c3e8da3$c8b7...@news.astraweb.com>, JF

Mezei <jfmezei...@vaxination.ca> wrote:

> Without VoLTE, making phone calls requires the radio swicth to 3G
> (UMTS/HSPA), but you can still do voice/data.

only if the phone supports two separate radios at the same time.

> But with Verizon, it needs
> to switch from LTE to CDMA at which point voice/data wasn't possible.

that doesn't change anything. it's still a second radio.

[nospam]

In article <58fd09fb$0$43864$c3e8da3$5e5e...@news.astraweb.com>, JF

Mezei <jfmezei...@vaxination.ca> wrote:

>
> > volte (voice over lte) solves that, but it is not yet fully deployed
> > everywhere and currently requires the same carrier on both ends.
>
> Since late last year, Rogers in Canada deployed "true" VoLTE service,
> not just the "gimmick" that only works in certain cases.
>
> when conencted over LTE, all calls, even to POTS destinations are done
> on LTE, and you phone does not switch down to 3G like it used to.

sounds good and long overdue.

> As for Sprint, it is not clear what their strategy is. If the nd game
> consist of moving customers onto thye T-Mobile network when the 2 merge,
> then there is less point in investing to upgrade the Sprint
> infrastructure that would be shut down anyways.

sprint already updated their network for lte and it works rather well.

[JF Mezei]

On 2017-04-23 13:28, Jolly Roger wrote:

> "I'm on my Verizon iPhone SE at the moment", I meant I was on a phone
> call at the time.

Look at the top left of screen to see if the iPhone indicated LTE or
CDMA when you make voice call AND do data at same time. Could indicate
whether you are on VoLTE (at which point voice/data is a no brainer) or
whether Verizon has enabled voice/data on the old CDMA stuff.

[JF Mezei]

On 2017-04-23 13:55, nospam wrote:

> edge does not support simultaneous voice/data and gprs is too slow for
> data at all.

I used it often on my old Siemens M55. it was 2G only and predated
UMTS/HSPA. (with headphones you could easily use the data functions on
phones).

> tethering is up to the carrier.

Yes and no. It wasn't up to them before because early phones didn't
differentiate so the carrier didn't know if packets were for tethering
or came from phone itself. It was only later that carriers siuch as AT&T
requested handset manufactures segragate tethering to another APN so the
carriers could differentiate and enable/disbale it.

> that's because ios has much better power management, something android
> 'o' supposedly addresses. better late than never.

I suspect IOS/Apple will remain significantly ahead of Android phones
for power consumption because they have both the OS , API/frameworks and
the hardware tuned for it.

[JF Mezei]

On 2017-04-23 13:58, Patty Winter wrote:

> I was hesitant about the SE because it sounds like a hybrid between
> a 5 and a 6, so I thought it might get tossed into the officially
> unsupported category sooner than the 6 models will.

The SE is essentially a smaller 6S. It has the 6S chip, fingerprint
reader, Apple Pay, live photos. Lacks 3d touch.


The 6 stopped being sold some time ago, so its "end of support" timer
has started, whereas the SE is still actively sold and no end in sight
to its support. And if this year, it doesn't get an upgrade and
continues to be sold, it means probably anotheer 4-5 years of support
for it.

(the 6S is still being sold, and is same generation as the SE in termns
of what is under the hood).

[nospam]

In article <58fd0d80$0$53074$c3e8da3$fdf4...@news.astraweb.com>, JF

Mezei <jfmezei...@vaxination.ca> wrote:

>
> > I was hesitant about the SE because it sounds like a hybrid between
> > a 5 and a 6, so I thought it might get tossed into the officially
> > unsupported category sooner than the 6 models will.
>
> The SE is essentially a smaller 6S. It has the 6S chip, fingerprint
> reader, Apple Pay, live photos. Lacks 3d touch.

the se has a 1st gen touch id sensor, not the 2nd gen of the 6s/7.

> The 6 stopped being sold some time ago, so its "end of support" timer
> has started, whereas the SE is still actively sold and no end in sight
> to its support. And if this year, it doesn't get an upgrade and
> continues to be sold, it means probably anotheer 4-5 years of support
> for it.
>
> (the 6S is still being sold, and is same generation as the SE in termns
> of what is under the hood).

yes.

[nospam]

In article <58fd0c6e$0$34564$c3e8da3$dbd...@news.astraweb.com>, JF

Mezei <jfmezei...@vaxination.ca> wrote:

>
> > edge does not support simultaneous voice/data and gprs is too slow for
> > data at all.
>
> I used it often on my old Siemens M55. it was 2G only and predated
> UMTS/HSPA. (with headphones you could easily use the data functions on
> phones).

not on edge, you didn't.

> > tethering is up to the carrier.
>
> Yes and no. It wasn't up to them before because early phones didn't
> differentiate so the carrier didn't know if packets were for tethering
> or came from phone itself. It was only later that carriers siuch as AT&T
> requested handset manufactures segragate tethering to another APN so the
> carriers could differentiate and enable/disbale it.

carriers could tell, but tethering wasn't widespread and it was also
so, so it didn't have much of an impact on the network.

iphones *without* tethering overloaded at&t's network, so the *last*
thing they wanted was *more* usage.

> > that's because ios has much better power management, something android
> > 'o' supposedly addresses. better late than never.
>
> I suspect IOS/Apple will remain significantly ahead of Android phones
> for power consumption because they have both the OS , API/frameworks and
> the hardware tuned for it.

well ahead.

[Jolly Roger]

On 2017-04-23, Patty Winter <pat...@wintertime.com> wrote:
>
> In article <em40ig...@mid.individual.net>,
> Jolly Roger <jolly...@pobox.com> wrote:
>>On 2017-04-23, Patty Winter <pat...@wintertime.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Both Verizon (her current provider) and AT&T (her Internet and home
>>> phone provider) offer iPhones, of course. AT&T has the iPhone 6,
>>> while Verizon starts with a 6S.
>>
>>Whoever told you that is incorrect. You can get the latest phone with
>>either service.
>
> Of course one can get an iPhone 7. I never said otherwise. But she
> doesn't need one.

Ah, okay. I misunderstood you. Sorry about that. But still if the
savings are relatively insignificant, I'd still go for the latest.

>>If I were you I would strongly advise her to purchase her iPhone from
>>Apple directly rather than one of the carriers. Apple will be more
>>knowledgeable about her options, and will even help her get data
>>(contacts, etc) onto the new phone if needed.
>
> I assume you mean data from her iMac? I can't imagine that there's any
> way to transfer data from her flip phone.

Apple can at least advise her about how to transfer the data; but they
may even do it for her. If she brings a Mac with her, it may make things
easier.

>>Don't forget the iPhone SE, which appeals to many people who, like me,
>>appreciate the small form factor over larger, more cumbersome models.
>
> Yes, it's small and less expensive, but will it become obsolete sooner
> than the 6 series phones?

Nah. It's a relatively recent phone. It'll get updates for years and
won't be obsolete any time soon. My wife and I just bought ours at the
beginning of 2017, and we'll probably keep them for a few years before
we think about replacing them. : )

>>>She may need to go with Verizon because she thinks that her daughter
>>>has had some reception problems with AT&T at her house. On the other
>>>hand, maybe she's using a lower- grade voice network with the flip
>>>phone and will experience similar problems with 4G LTE on Verizon;
>>>any theories on that?
>>
>>It sounds like Verizon would be better for her. I've used both Verizon
>>and AT&T, and have had better coverage in multiple states with
>>Verizon, personally. You can find out what the coverage looks like for
>>a given area on their respective web sites:
>>
>><https://vzwmap.verizonwireless.com/dotcom/coveragelocator/>
>>
>><https://www.att.com/maps/wireless-coverage.html>
>
> Oh yes, I was zoomed in on both of those last night. They both claim
> that she has full 4G LTE coverage at her house. Her daughter's
> experience suggests otherwise, at least for AT&T. Is there any way of
> predicting whether Verizon only seems better now because she isn't
> using it for 4G LTE?

I've never bothered to investigate it. You could call them and ask, or
look for people in your area with experience with it, I suppose. There's
an app called CarrierCompare on the App Store that lets you test and
compare your local service connectivity and compare it with others in
your area:

<https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/carriercompare-compare-speed-across-networks/id516075262>

>>> Any thoughts on the best way to proceed in this situation?
>>
>>Rather than putting it off to wait for new models, I'd just get the
>>latest model that is available now. I'd definitely avoid getting an
>>older model unless money is a significant factor, in which case I'd
>>still recommend looking at the iPhone SE, since it's cheaper than the
>>larger models yet is fairly up to date in terms of the technologies
>>included.
>
> So the SE isn't likely to get obsoleted at the same time as the 5s?
> (That's the plural "5," not "5ess.") I was concerned that it might.

The iPhone 5 is a successor of the iPhone 5S which came after the iPhone
5; so no.

> She could easily afford a 7; I just don't see how it's worth it for
> her except for the fact that Apple will be supporting it later than a
> 6. Is that enough of a factor to warrant the extra $100 over a 6?

There are other differences to consider:

The iPhone 7 is waterproofed, while the 6 is not.

The 7 has the A10 Fusion processor that's said to be two times faster
than the A8 in the 6; it also has a faster GPU said to be three times
faster than GPU in the A8.

Battery life is better too (roughly a couple hours longer than the 6S).

The 7's screen is 25% brighter with a better color gamut (richer
colors).

The lowest 7 comes with 32GB of storage, while the lowest 6 comes with
only 16GB.

The 7 has 3D Touch, while the 6 does not.

The 7 has a 12-megapixel rear camera capable of 4K (versus an
8-megapixel on the 6) with a better lens than the 6; and the front
camera of the 7 is updated to a 7-megapixel camera with image
stabilization and Retina flash (the screen acts as a flash).

[nospam]

In article <em4kcl...@mid.individual.net>, Jolly Roger

<jolly...@pobox.com> wrote:

> >
> > So the SE isn't likely to get obsoleted at the same time as the 5s?
> > (That's the plural "5," not "5ess.") I was concerned that it might.
>
> The iPhone 5 is a successor of the iPhone 5S which came after the iPhone
> 5; so no.

you meant the iphone se is a successor of the 5s which came after the
iphone 5.

[Jolly Roger]

On 2017-04-23, JF Mezei <jfmezei...@vaxination.ca> wrote:

LTE:

<https://i.imgur.com/0UJPoTI.jpg>

[Patty Winter]

In article <em4kcl...@mid.individual.net>,

Jolly Roger <jolly...@pobox.com> wrote:
>
> if the
>savings are relatively insignificant, I'd still go for the latest.

The basic 7 runs $100 more than the 6s and $250 more than the SE.
My friend can afford a 7; I just don't want to push her into something
she doesn't need. For example, she certainly doesn't need a whiz-bang
camera. But if you feel there are other advantages to the 7 (including
lifespan), I'll relay those to her. [Note: I see that you did spell
out some other differences later in your posting, thanks.]


[re the SE]

>> Yes, it's small and less expensive, but will it become obsolete sooner
>> than the 6 series phones?
>
>Nah. It's a relatively recent phone. It'll get updates for years and
>won't be obsolete any time soon. My wife and I just bought ours at the
>beginning of 2017, and we'll probably keep them for a few years before
>we think about replacing them. : )

What's your take on an SE vs. "the latest" you mentioned earlier?

>There's
>an app called CarrierCompare on the App Store that lets you test and
>compare your local service connectivity and compare it with others in
>your area:
>
><https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/carriercompare-compare-speed-across-networks/id516075262>

Oh, thanks, I could put that on my iPhone and go to her house to see
what reports people are giving for Verizon in her neighborhood.

>There are other differences to consider:
>
>The iPhone 7 is waterproofed, while the 6 is not.
>
>The 7 has the A10 Fusion processor that's said to be two times faster
>than the A8 in the 6; it also has a faster GPU said to be three times
>faster than GPU in the A8.
>
>Battery life is better too (roughly a couple hours longer than the 6S).
>
>The 7's screen is 25% brighter with a better color gamut (richer
>colors).
>
>The lowest 7 comes with 32GB of storage, while the lowest 6 comes with
>only 16GB.
>
>The 7 has 3D Touch, while the 6 does not.
>
>The 7 has a 12-megapixel rear camera capable of 4K (versus an
>8-megapixel on the 6) with a better lens than the 6; and the front
>camera of the 7 is updated to a 7-megapixel camera with image
>stabilization and Retina flash (the screen acts as a flash).

I doubt that any of those features are significant to my friend,
but I'll certainly pass them along to her, thanks.


Patty

[Jolly Roger]

On 2017-04-23, Patty Winter <pat...@wintertime.com> wrote:
>

> In article <em4kcl...@mid.individual.net>,
> Jolly Roger <jolly...@pobox.com> wrote:
>>
>> if the savings are relatively insignificant, I'd still go for the
>> latest.
>
> The basic 7 runs $100 more than the 6s and $250 more than the SE. My
> friend can afford a 7; I just don't want to push her into something
> she doesn't need. For example, she certainly doesn't need a whiz-bang
> camera. But if you feel there are other advantages to the 7 (including
> lifespan), I'll relay those to her. [Note: I see that you did spell
> out some other differences later in your posting, thanks.]

Unless there are specific features or upgrades in the 7 (versus the 6S),
I'd say she'd do well to pocket those savings.

> [re the SE]
>>> Yes, it's small and less expensive, but will it become obsolete sooner
>>> than the 6 series phones?
>>
>>Nah. It's a relatively recent phone. It'll get updates for years and
>>won't be obsolete any time soon. My wife and I just bought ours at the
>>beginning of 2017, and we'll probably keep them for a few years before
>>we think about replacing them. : )
>
> What's your take on an SE vs. "the latest" you mentioned earlier?

Personally, considering there is no other newer small-form-factor model
available, and the hardware inside is in many ways equivalent to the 6S,
it's plenty new enough for me!

>>There's an app called CarrierCompare on the App Store that lets you
>>test and compare your local service connectivity and compare it with
>>others in your area:
>>
>><https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/carriercompare-compare-speed-across-networks/id516075262>
>
> Oh, thanks, I could put that on my iPhone and go to her house to see
> what reports people are giving for Verizon in her neighborhood.

Yeah, I figured it might help you make a decision at least.

>>There are other differences to consider:
>>
>>The iPhone 7 is waterproofed, while the 6 is not.
>>
>>The 7 has the A10 Fusion processor that's said to be two times faster
>>than the A8 in the 6; it also has a faster GPU said to be three times
>>faster than GPU in the A8.
>>
>>Battery life is better too (roughly a couple hours longer than the 6S).
>>
>>The 7's screen is 25% brighter with a better color gamut (richer
>>colors).
>>
>>The lowest 7 comes with 32GB of storage, while the lowest 6 comes with
>>only 16GB.
>>
>>The 7 has 3D Touch, while the 6 does not.
>>
>>The 7 has a 12-megapixel rear camera capable of 4K (versus an
>>8-megapixel on the 6) with a better lens than the 6; and the front
>>camera of the 7 is updated to a 7-megapixel camera with image
>>stabilization and Retina flash (the screen acts as a flash).
>
> I doubt that any of those features are significant to my friend,
> but I'll certainly pass them along to her, thanks.

That's cool. If not, I'd save the money and get the 6S or the SE,
personally. One thing I will say is if she can afford the higher bracket
of storage, she may want to get it. A lot of folks run into the 16GB
limit quickly, especially those who install a lot of larger apps (games,
and so on). Having never used a smart phone, it's hard to say what her
actual needs will be, but better to play it safe than be sorry when you
run into the limit and your only option is to buy a new phone.

[JF Mezei]

On 2017-04-23 16:15, nospam wrote:

> that doesn't change anything. it's still a second radio.

iPhones have had a single radio either since the start or for a long
time already. It switches modes as needed.

Software driven radios are what givesn you not only support for
different protocols but also so many frequencies. Before that, phones
were limited to 3 or 4 bands.

[JF Mezei]

The 6s supports standard headphones.

the 7 doesn't have headphone jack, either need an adaptopr of apple
proprietary headphones that plug into lightning connector.

The 7 has stereo speakers though, the 6s mono.

[Jolly Roger]

On 2017-04-23, JF Mezei <jfmezei...@vaxination.ca> wrote:

> The 6s supports standard headphones.
>
> the 7 doesn't have headphone jack, either need an adaptopr

It comes with the required adapter in the box.

> apple proprietary headphones

It comes with those in the box too.

> The 7 has stereo speakers though, the 6s mono.

[Alan Browne]

On 2017-04-23 02:17, Patty Winter wrote:

> Any thoughts on the best way to proceed in this situation?

Stop making it complicated. Get the latest version but pared down in
size and memory. iPhone 7+32 GB.

It's whiz-bang beyond her needs? Sure, but she can run it for 4 years,
easily and not find it sluggish or lacking.

The notion of waiting for the 8 to come out, to me, means get the 8 and
enjoy it for 4 years (depending on the carrier "offering" if you go that
way).

--
"If war is God's way of teaching Americans geography, then
recession is His way of teaching everyone a little economics."
..Raj Patel, The Value of Nothing.

[nospam]

In article <58fd338a$0$1240$c3e8da3$1cbc...@news.astraweb.com>, JF

Mezei <jfmezei...@vaxination.ca> wrote:

>
> > that doesn't change anything. it's still a second radio.
>
> iPhones have had a single radio either since the start or for a long
> time already. It switches modes as needed.

lte phones currently require two radios, lte for data and hspa/cdma for
voice (and where there's no lte coverage). some phones can use both at
the same time, which allows for voice/data at the same time, while
other phones can't.

volte will eliminate the need for the second radio, except that not all
carriers support volte yet and lte coverage is not everywhere either.

at some point, there won't need to be hspa/cdma fallback, but that day
is not here.

[nospam]

In article <58fd34a8$0$1240$c3e8da3$1cbc...@news.astraweb.com>, JF

Mezei <jfmezei...@vaxination.ca> wrote:

> The 6s supports standard headphones.
>
> the 7 doesn't have headphone jack, either need an adaptopr of apple
> proprietary headphones that plug into lightning connector.

both of which are included, so it's not an issue.

quite a few android phones don't have an analog headphone jack either.
some include adapters and some don't.

analog headphones are going away. it ain't just apple.

[Lewis]

In message <230420171256038080%nos...@nospam.invalid> nospam <nos...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> In article <em441l...@mid.individual.net>, Jolly Roger
> <jolly...@pobox.com> wrote:

>>
>> The only thing that matters to a real person in the end is that with
>> Sprint and iPhones you very often *cannot* do simultaneous voice and
>> data, which is precisely what I warned Patty about. It's definitely
>> something she and her friend should consider when making their carrier
>> decision.

> it applies to all carriers, including verizon, t-mobile and at&t. it's
> an issue with lte and the design of the phone itself.

In theory? Perhaps. However, I've never run into it on T-Mobile. Never.


--
A TRAINED APE COULD NOT TEACH GYM Bart chalkboard Ep. AABF15

[Lewis]

In message <odicuh$koh$2...@dont-email.me> philo <ph...@privacy.net> wrote:
> My wife has an iPhone and loves it, but I bought an Android because it
> was about 1/10th the price.

That must be a really shitty phone.

Or you're lying.

--
Space Directive 723: Terraformers are expressly forbidden from
recreating Swindon.

[nospam]

In article <slrnofqe53....@snow.local>, Lewis

<g.k...@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:

> In message <odicuh$koh$2...@dont-email.me> philo <ph...@privacy.net> wrote:
> > My wife has an iPhone and loves it, but I bought an Android because it
> > was about 1/10th the price.
>
> That must be a really shitty phone.
>
> Or you're lying.

could be both.

he probably got some pos on clearance and thinks it's a valid
comparison to a new non-discounted iphone.

[JF Mezei]

On 2017-04-23 19:20, nospam wrote:

> lte phones currently require two radios,

Wrong. Most phones have a single radio which switches mode.

Settings->Cellular->Cellular data Options->Enable LTE-> Data only.

You will see your phone at LTE for data. And when you dial a voice phone
number, you will see your phone change to 3G. (or whatever the USA
carrier has configured HSPA/UMTS to appear on your phone, some call it 4G).

(and if on CDMA, I guess it will switch to CDMA). That is because there
is a single radio and it needs to turn off LTE and swicth to the lower
generation to make the voice call.

(don't forget to turn VolTE back on).

2 radios would cost more to build, takeup a lot more space, have
interference issues, and take a whole lot more power if both keep
scanning airwaves for signals.

The ability to switch modes simply means the chip has software that
handles different protocols and frequencies. It doesn't mean there are
different phsyical radios.

[nospam]

In article <58fd3ef5$0$8087$b1db1813$2411...@news.astraweb.com>, JF

Mezei <jfmezei...@vaxination.ca> wrote:

>
> > lte phones currently require two radios,
>
> Wrong. Most phones have a single radio which switches mode.

no.

> Settings->Cellular->Cellular data Options->Enable LTE-> Data only.

that doesn't do what you think it does.

[JF Mezei]

On 2017-04-23 19:58, nospam wrote:

>> Settings->Cellular->Cellular data Options->Enable LTE-> Data only.
>
> that doesn't do what you think it does.

If the iPhone had 2 radios, it would be able to maintain LTE for data
while using UMTS or CDMA for voice call. (when VoLTE is turned off).

The fact that data has to come down to 3G (or 2.5 G for CDMA) when
making a voice call means there is a single radio.

Also, look at the iFixit tear downs when the itemize the parts, and you
will see just 1 radio chip.

[nospam]

In article <58fd428d$0$34691$c3e8da3$dbd...@news.astraweb.com>, JF

Mezei <jfmezei...@vaxination.ca> wrote:

>
> >> Settings->Cellular->Cellular data Options->Enable LTE-> Data only.
> >
> > that doesn't do what you think it does.
>
> If the iPhone had 2 radios, it would be able to maintain LTE for data
> while using UMTS or CDMA for voice call. (when VoLTE is turned off).

some do, some don't.

>
> The fact that data has to come down to 3G (or 2.5 G for CDMA) when
> making a voice call means there is a single radio.
>
> Also, look at the iFixit tear downs when the itemize the parts, and you
> will see just 1 radio chip.

this may come to you as a surprise, but chips can do more than one
function.

[Tomos Davies]

In <news:odirfp$ug1$3...@dont-email.me>, Patty Winter suggested:

> Yes, it's small and less expensive, but will it become obsolete sooner
> than the 6 series phones?

You have to make your objectives realistic with the constraints.

Your "obsolete" argument is sort of like the argument Hitler made for the
jet engine in WWII, which is that the engine itself is best used for
fighters but he wanted fast bombers at first, which slowed down the
effective production of the fighters - which cost him dearly in the end.

Same with your stated goals being out of wack with your stated constraints.

Specifically, the goals of moving from a flip phone to a smart phone are
incongruous with the goals of moving to the absolute latest and greatest
(and vastly most expensive) iPhone 8 which isn't even out yet - simply
because of some incongruous concept of sheer "fashion".

For someone on a flip phone, worrying about whether any modern smart phone
will become "outdated" is an utterly ridiculous constraint unless all the
lady cares about is 'style', but then why is she on a flip phone?

Do you see that your arguments for her make utterly no sense?

The right phone for this lady, based only on your initial conditions stated
(as I didn't read the whole thread), is obviously and surely an entry level
smart phone.

If money is no object, then you don't even need to ask the question - and
you can get *any* smart phone (including an iPhone 8); but if she's really
a flip phone user, then money probably is an object so paying through the
nose purely for the cachet of owning an iPhone 8 (which is far less
functional than my own circa 2012 Samsung Galaxy S3) is a ridiculous
decision.

1. Go iOS (simply because this lady is not a genius & has similar friends)
2. Go with any entry level iOS phone that fits her hand & purse.

[nospam]

In article <odjlm4$esj$1...@news.mixmin.net>, Tomos Davies

<cariad...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Your "obsolete" argument is sort of like the argument Hitler

godwin's law invoked.

[Tomos Davies]

In <news:odj8ms$jnb$1...@dont-email.me>, Patty Winter suggested:

> The basic 7 runs $100 more than the 6s and $250 more than the SE.
> My friend can afford a 7; I just don't want to push her into something
> she doesn't need. For example, she certainly doesn't need a whiz-bang
> camera. But if you feel there are other advantages to the 7 (including
> lifespan), I'll relay those to her. [Note: I see that you did spell
> out some other differences later in your posting, thanks.]

This whole argument about "functionality" is a red herring.

1. Get a smart phone (any smart phone)
2. Get iOS because the lady isn't a technowiz & she has similar friends
3. Pick the thing by something the old lday cares about.

What does the old lady care about?
a. Probably she cares about size.
b. And maybe even color.
c. And likely price.

That's it. There are your three major logical criteria.

Trying to choose "by functionality" between a series of decidedly non
functional devices is really just an exercise in futility. There is no app
functionality in the iPhone 8 that isn't in an Android phone half its price
and five years ago and certainly nothing in the iPhone 8 that this old lady
needs that isn't in the cheapest iPhone available today.

Therefore whole functionality argument is a red herring.

[Tomos Davies]

In <news:230420172201543179%nos...@nospam.invalid>, nospam suggested:

>> Your "obsolete" argument is sort of like the argument Hitler
>
> godwin's law invoked.

True.

But my point is that Patty Winter is obsessing about the wrong things.

The old lady is on a flip phone, for heaven's sake.
Any smart phone is a huge "upgrade" from a flip phone!

Yet, to obsess about the "functionality" of an iPhone 8 is ridiculous given
that there is less app functionality in an iPhone 8 than in my five year
old S3, and certainly in any current half-the-price Android phone.

I would sincerely recommend to Patty's friend that she needs to consider
what is important to her, where functionality, if it's really important,
would mean Android - and not iOS - beyond a doubt.

Yet, she wants iOS (which is fine given her friends use iOS and the old
lady isn't a technowiz so iOS is probably better for her anyway).

So the choice is crystal clear - if only Patty Winter would realize it.

1. iOS (becuase the friends use iOS and it's far better than a flipper)
2. Whatever the old lady cares about physically

What does the old lady care about?

I don't know but I'd suggest she choose the phone what makes sense to her:
a. Size
b. Color
c. And price

If the old lady really cared about app functionality, she wouldn't be
considering iOS in the first place. The old lady doesn't need the app
functionality of Android anyway. Any iOS phone has plenty more
functionality than does any flip phone already.

[nospam]

In article <odjmf1$gc7$1...@news.mixmin.net>, Tomos Davies

<cariad...@gmail.com> wrote:

> There is no app
> functionality in the iPhone 8 that isn't in an Android phone half its price

the iphone 8 doesn't exist so you can't make that claim.

[Tomos Davies]

In <news:230420172213465940%nos...@nospam.invalid>, nospam suggested:

>> There is no app
>> functionality in the iPhone 8 that isn't in an Android phone half its price
>
> the iphone 8 doesn't exist so you can't make that claim.

Wanna bet?

The very successful Apple Marketing Machine isn't all of a sudden going to
do a 180 degree about face to allow the kind of app functionality that I
have on my circa 2012 S3, like youtube sans advertisements, automatic call
recording, bit torrenting, any app launcher, ability to set screen
orientation by app, renaming of icons to make sense, ability to scan wifi &
cellular with detailed connection information graphically over time, etc.

Anyway, Patty's dilemma is no dilemma at all.

1. Pick a pretty phone of the right size that fits in the old lady's purse.
2. Choose iOS because her friends on iOS can help her get used to it.
3. Choose *any* iPhone she wants (they're all the same for her purposes).

Seriously. We're moving from a flip phone here.

If functionality were truly the critical criterion, she wouldn't even be
considering iOS in the first place - so it's a red herring.

Any iPhone model is already huge upgrade for the old lady in question.

[nospam]

In article <odjni3$ick$1...@news.mixmin.net>, Tomos Davies

<cariad...@gmail.com> wrote:

> >> There is no app
> >> functionality in the iPhone 8 that isn't in an Android phone half its price
> >
> > the iphone 8 doesn't exist so you can't make that claim.
>
> Wanna bet?

you've already lost. an iphone 5s from a few years ago can do stuff
android only wishes it could do.

what you refuse to understand is that there are things that one
platform can do that the other cannot.

>
> Anyway, Patty's dilemma is no dilemma at all.

especially since it's not her dilemma nor is she interested in your
comments.

[Tomos Davies]

In <news:230420171936350048%nos...@nospam.invalid>, nospam suggested:

> he probably got some pos on clearance and thinks it's a valid
> comparison to a new non-discounted iphone.

I just saw his 1/10th the price figure and also doubted it if it's based on
hardware functionality (but look below - maybe not).

On hardware, I usually figure on getting an equivalent phone for about 1/2
the price, not 1/10th the price. (Yes, we know that nospam always cherry
picks the worst Android price-to-performance to make *his* comparisons -
which doesn't take any brains to do).

On software, *every* Android device has so much more app functionality than
*any* iOS device that the 1/10th the price comparison holds true, if you
can get a decent Android device for 80 bucks or so.

The price constantly changes but I just googled for this $83 5.5-inch
2GB/16GB Quad-core 1GHz HomTom HT7 Pro 4G Phablet for example, which is
roughly about 1/10th the price (give or take) and which has far more app
functionality than any iOS device will ever have.

The hardware functionality, for ~1/10th the price, is pretty good too.
I didn't compare with the iOS 10x price device though.

Which iOS 10X price device was the user thinking about?

[Tomos Davies]

In <news:odiq0a$ug1$1...@dont-email.me>, Patty Winter suggested:

> I was hesitant about the SE because it sounds like a hybrid between
> a 5 and a 6, so I thought it might get tossed into the officially
> unsupported category sooner than the 6 models will.

Support is a red herring, based on what you've already told us.

If the old lady was really so worried about 'support', she wouldn't still
be on a flip phone.

The Apple Marketing Machine has your brain snagged, hook, line, and sinker.

They *want* you to obsess exactly about what you are obsessing about.
Support?

Jesus.
Of all things to worry about for an old lady moving from a flip phone to a
smart phone.

Worry more about price, size, and color.
That's what matters to this old lady.

Not "support".
Her "support" is gonna come from her friends on iOS anyway.
Not from Apple.

[Bob...@onramp.net]

You've referred to the lady in question as "the old lady" several
times. It seems disrespectful. Patty didn't make mention of her age.

[Tomos Davies]

In <news:230420172227255081%nos...@nospam.invalid>, nospam suggested:

> an iphone 5s from a few years ago can do stuff
> android only wishes it could do.

As always, you just make this stuff up.
Playing to the gullible only works here (look at your results on the Linux
ng, for example).

Always discussing non-rooted/non-jailbroken devices, we've long ago proven
there is zero app functionality on iOS that isn't already on Android, and
that even the latest iOS phone will never have the app functionality that
my five year old circa 2012 Android phone has.

What I said is fact:

"The very successful Apple Marketing Machine isn't all of a sudden going to
do a 180 degree about face to allow the kind of app functionality that I
have on my circa 2012 S3, like youtube sans advertisements, automatic call
recording, bit torrenting, any app launcher, ability to set screen
orientation by app, renaming of icons to make sense, ability to scan wifi &
cellular with detailed connection information graphically over time, etc."

The thread is to help advise Patty of what she needs to consider, where
Patty is clearly flustered by the bs that the very successful Apple
Marketing Machine puts out.

While Patty is under the spell of the Apple Marketing Machine, others are
more clear headed as to what she really should be worried about.

The point here is simply that Patty's marketing-induced dilemma should have
nothing whatsoever to do with "app functionality".

If app functionality was really of concern, she wouldn't be considering an
iOS phone for her friend in the first place.

What her friend needs, based on what Patty outlined, is simple:
- Any iOS phone of a suitable color & size to fit her friend's purse.

[Tomos Davies]

In <news:i9qqfcllve2u1durl...@4ax.com>, Bob...@Onramp.net
suggested:

>>Any iPhone model is already huge upgrade for the old lady in question.
>
> You've referred to the lady in question as "the old lady" several
> times. It seems disrespectful. Patty didn't make mention of her age.

Thank you!

Normally I disparage you for lack of attention to detail.
In this case, had *assumed* an old lady.

That may or may not be the case but you are correct that Patty probably
didn't state the age of her friend (I haven't read all her posts though).

Thanks for pointing that out.
That brings you up by a notch since you paid attention to detail.

[Chris]

Patty Winter <pat...@wintertime.com> wrote:
>
> In article <odhuq0$l83$1...@gioia.aioe.org>, Wilf <wi...@replyto.newsgroup> wrote:
>> On 23/04/2017 10:31 am, Chris wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
>>> Take her to an Apple store or similar to test one out or lend her one of
>>> yours. I'd say she may find a 6 to be a big step up. She may find the
>>> smaller size of an SE to be a better fit.
>>
>> I agree an SE might be the best bet, not only because of size but also
>> in terms of price.
>
> Yes, we'll certainly have her try out the different phone sizes before
> she buys one.

>
> I was hesitant about the SE because it sounds like a hybrid between
> a 5 and a 6, so I thought it might get tossed into the officially
> unsupported category sooner than the 6 models will.
>

Nope. Internally it's the same as a 6s. So will have the same longevity as
the 6s.

[Jolly Roger]

Likewise with both Verizon and AT&T.

[Bob...@onramp.net]

My life's pursuit.

[Zaidy036]

On 4/23/2017 2:17 AM, Patty Winter wrote:
> A friend of mine currently has a flip phone, but she'd like to get
> a smartphone so that she can use Lyft and Uber and take photos. The
> battery in her current phone is on its way out, so she'll either
> need to buy a new phone soon or get a new battery for the flip phone
> to tide her over for a while.
>
> She's interested in an iPhone, which is good because her daughter,
> her son-in-law, and I all have iPhones and therefore could help her
> learn about it. Also, she has an iMac, so she's accustomed to Apple's
> interfaces.
>
> Both Verizon (her current provider) and AT&T (her Internet and home
> phone provider) offer iPhones, of course. AT&T has the iPhone 6,
> while Verizon starts with a 6S. She may need to go with Verizon
> because she thinks that her daughter has had some reception problems
> with AT&T at her house. On the other hand, maybe she's using a lower-
> grade voice network with the flip phone and will experience similar
> problems with 4G LTE on Verizon; any theories on that?
>
> At this point, I'm wondering whether to suggest that she go ahead and
> get an iPhone 6, or whether she should get a replacement battery for
> her current phone and wait for prices to drop after the iPhone 8 comes
> out. The latter is what her SIL is recommending. She certainly doesn't
> need the latest whiz-bang features, so I'm hesitant to recommend an
> iPhone 7, even though that would have a longer "shelf life."

>
> Any thoughts on the best way to proceed in this situation?
>
>

> Thanks,
>
> Patty
>

Friend should look into which service family uses because then those
calls will be free. But must also check if that provider has good signal
in friend's home.

Unless money is a problem the newest iPhone should be purchased AND if a
lot of pictures will be taken then a large memory size should be selected.

[Patty Winter]

In article <odlqke$blu$1...@dont-email.me>, Zaidy036 <Zaid...@isp.spam> wrote:

[snip]

>Friend should look into which service family uses because then those
>calls will be free.

Oh, good point. Although I think all of the options we're looking at
have unlimited calls within the U.S., so I doubt that she'd even need
free in-family calling.

>But must also check if that provider has good signal
>in friend's home.

Yes, we'll have to see whether there's a conflict between those two
goals.

>Unless money is a problem the newest iPhone should be purchased AND if a
>lot of pictures will be taken then a large memory size should be selected.

Probably not many photos, but I'll ask.


Patty

[Patty Winter]

In article <em4kcl...@mid.individual.net>,
Jolly Roger <jolly...@pobox.com> wrote:
>
>I've never bothered to investigate it. You could call them and ask, or
>look for people in your area with experience with it, I suppose. There's
>an app called CarrierCompare on the App Store that lets you test and
>compare your local service connectivity and compare it with others in
>your area:
>
><https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/carriercompare-compare-speed-across-networks/id516075262>

Well, I just downloaded that app, and after closing the alert from
Apple that it's about to stop working on iOS and the developer needs
to update it, I ran it, but got an error that it couldn't connect to
the comparison database. Perhaps the app is no longer supported? I was
able to get an analysis of my AT&T service, but without the comparison
database, I won't be able to tell how AT&T compares to Verizon at my
friend's house. :-(


Patty

[nospam]

In article <odm3vk$6hb$3...@dont-email.me>, Patty Winter

the last update for the app was march, 2013, when iphone 5 support was
added. his other app hasn't been updated since april 2015. that sounds
like the developer is no longer developing apps anymore (at least not
independently), so i wouldn't expect any updates any time soon.

[Patty Winter]

I just found another app that has crowd-sourced cellular coverage
data:

https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/cell-phone-coverage-map/id399701910?mt=8

I don't see any way of finding out how fresh the data are, but at least
this developer updated the app only about six months ago, and apparently
they're a professional network monitoring company, so the app should be
quite accurate.


Patty

[JF Mezei]

I have a friend who has been anti Apple but has been buying cheap
Android phones. (his most recent has a 2MP camera if that gives you an
idea).

He realises he needs a better quality one, so I have been trying to
gently nudge him towards Apple. But my suggestions are on the SE or 6s.

To me the two phone are on par in terms of features. (I have 3D touch
disabled on my 6s). So the SE is the smaller version that is less
expensive.

For a guy moving from a 2MP lousy camera, the camera on the SE or 6S
will be amazing, and the mechanical stabilization on the 7 would be
overkill considering where he is coming from.

Note however that the 7 with its wide angle and telephoto lenses could
be interesting since often the wide angle is more of less useless for
outdoor shots and requires software zooming which decreases image
resolution.

[Jolly Roger]

Nice find, thanks, Patty. : )

[Patty Winter]

A few follow-up questions:

* What does "port-in" mean? Verizon is offering a $200 Visa card
for people who bring their own iPhone 6 to Verizon, or $100 off
the cost of a 6s if they buy it from Verizon. Sounds like this
is only for people switching from another carrier? My friend already
has a Verizon account.

* Do they really charge $20 a month for something called a "line
access charge"? That sure increases the cost of a $35/month plan!

* There's no mention of whether these plans involve contracts. Maybe
they don't if you bring your own phone?


Patty

[nospam]

In article <odogoe$8jf$1...@dont-email.me>, Patty Winter

<pat...@wintertime.com> wrote:

> A few follow-up questions:
>
> * What does "port-in" mean?

porting allows consumers to switch carriers and keep the same number.

to port-in an existing number to a new carrier, you will need certain
information from the current carrier so that it can be ported out. for
cellular numbers, there's usually a pin code in addition to the number.

> Verizon is offering a $200 Visa card
> for people who bring their own iPhone 6 to Verizon, or $100 off
> the cost of a 6s if they buy it from Verizon. Sounds like this
> is only for people switching from another carrier? My friend already
> has a Verizon account.

you can get more than $200 if you flip it on ebay, although it can be
more hassle than being handed a $200 gift card.

the problem with gift cards is that they can be a pain to use the full
value (and not always accepted everywhere even if they're supposed to
be) and they're counting on that.

> * Do they really charge $20 a month for something called a "line
> access charge"? That sure increases the cost of a $35/month plan!

probably.

there are all sorts of hidden fees, taxes and other stuff.

mvnos don't generally pull that shit.

> * There's no mention of whether these plans involve contracts. Maybe
> they don't if you bring your own phone?

there aren't service contracts anymore, and you can thank t-mobile for
that. you can cancel at any time without penalty.

however, you will need to pay for the phone in full when you sign up
for service (or bring a phone you already own).

if you can't pay for the phone in full (or choose not to), you can
finance it through the carrier, which although is a contract, it's not
one for service. you can still cancel service, but you will need to
repay the loan for the phone. if you don't repay, the phone will be
blacklisted and not usable anywhere, making it not worth much on the
used market.

[Jolly Roger]

On 2017-04-25, Patty Winter <pat...@wintertime.com> wrote:
> A few follow-up questions:
>

> * Do they really charge $20 a month for something called a "line
> access charge"? That sure increases the cost of a $35/month plan!

Yep. The $35/month is for the 2GB of data. The Line Access charge ($20
per phone) is what Verizon charges you to use their phone network.

> * There's no mention of whether these plans involve contracts. Maybe
> they don't if you bring your own phone?

I'm pretty sure you'd have to start a new contract with a new phone. If
she purchases the phone directly from Apple they will set it all up for
her. It's *way* less trouble when Apple does it. You can even do it all
straight from the Apple web site if you want.

[Patty Winter]

In article <ema2d6...@mid.individual.net>,

Jolly Roger <jolly...@pobox.com> wrote:
>On 2017-04-25, Patty Winter <pat...@wintertime.com> wrote:
>> A few follow-up questions:
>>
>> * Do they really charge $20 a month for something called a "line
>> access charge"? That sure increases the cost of a $35/month plan!
>
>Yep. The $35/month is for the 2GB of data. The Line Access charge ($20
>per phone) is what Verizon charges you to use their phone network.

Wow, that makes it much more expensive. So she'd be better off paying
$40/month for 2GB of data on Verizon's prepaid plan, right? Is there
some downside of a prepaid plan that I'm not seeing?

>> * There's no mention of whether these plans involve contracts. Maybe
>> they don't if you bring your own phone?
>
>I'm pretty sure you'd have to start a new contract with a new phone. If
>she purchases the phone directly from Apple they will set it all up for
>her. It's *way* less trouble when Apple does it. You can even do it all
>straight from the Apple web site if you want.

Do you mean that the Apple store folks can set up a Verizon plan? I
think my friend should call Verizon herself to find out whether she
can get some kind of deal as a current customer. I doubt that Apple
store people would know about that.


Patty

[nospam]

In article <odokri$qdh$1...@dont-email.me>, Patty Winter

<pat...@wintertime.com> wrote:

> >> * Do they really charge $20 a month for something called a "line
> >> access charge"? That sure increases the cost of a $35/month plan!
> >
> >Yep. The $35/month is for the 2GB of data. The Line Access charge ($20
> >per phone) is what Verizon charges you to use their phone network.
>
> Wow, that makes it much more expensive. So she'd be better off paying
> $40/month for 2GB of data on Verizon's prepaid plan, right? Is there
> some downside of a prepaid plan that I'm not seeing?

it depends on usage. for some people, prepaid is cheaper. for others
it's not. prepaid skips the credit check so for some people, it's their
only option.

most prepaid is actually postpaid in disguise. you still choose a plan
(e.g., 2g/mo) and pay that whether or not you use it, and if you go
over, the overages can be rather steep. some prepaid is truly prepaid
and whatever you use is what you pay.

> >> * There's no mention of whether these plans involve contracts. Maybe
> >> they don't if you bring your own phone?
> >
> >I'm pretty sure you'd have to start a new contract with a new phone. If
> >she purchases the phone directly from Apple they will set it all up for
> >her. It's *way* less trouble when Apple does it. You can even do it all
> >straight from the Apple web site if you want.
>
> Do you mean that the Apple store folks can set up a Verizon plan? I
> think my friend should call Verizon herself to find out whether she
> can get some kind of deal as a current customer. I doubt that Apple
> store people would know about that.

apple can activate a phone on any of the four major carriers, or sell
it unactivated and can activate the phone wherever you want (or not at
all).

if you go through apple, you won't be eligible for carrier promos.

[JF Mezei]

On 2017-04-25 19:07, Patty Winter wrote:

> Do you mean that the Apple store folks can set up a Verizon plan?

Apple is an authorized retail reseller of all the carriers it has a
relationship with. They' will aopssciate your new phone to your
cellular account for you (and even lock it if that carrier requires it).

What Apple can't do is give you carrier rates that are not published.
(unless your file authorizes such a deal).

> think my friend should call Verizon herself to find out whether she
> can get some kind of deal as a current customer.

Generally, "current customer" = no deal. You have to either be a new
customer or threaten to move to another carrier which gets you
transfered to "retention" where the agents have powers to give you deals.

If your flip-phone has not been fully repaid yet, it should be easy for
them to waive the remaining (fake) balance as to them, that phone has
been paid off long time ago already.

You will find that they are more amenable to deals if you buy a new
phone under contract since the deal will at least pretty much garantee
you stay with them for 2 years during which they don't worry about you
calling and theeaten to leave undell you get an even better deal.

If you are an existing BYOD customer and get a new BOYD phone, then all
they look at is your monthly spending. If you are above ARPU, then their
folks are able to give you some deal, but below ARPU, they are not so
intereste since you are already below what they expect to get from you
every month. (ARPU = Average Revenue Per Unit). (yes, customers are
"Units").

Do your research with the main carriers or with MVNOs and if you find a
much better deal with them, you call Verizon, tell them you are looking
at deal X from carrier Y and wonder if they can match or better them.

Verizon may argue they have superior coverage that carrier Y. You have
to be ready to respond that carrier Y has good coverage where you
live/work and you don't travel much so that is not an advantage to you.

[sms]

The 6 stock will be quite old. Remember, Li-Ion batteries begin to lose
capacity as soon as they are manufactured and a 6 could be more than two
years old.

You can buy an iPhone directly from Apple and there are some advantages
to doing so. Also you can get a refurbished 6s which includes a new
battery and is $100 less (but no Apple financing).

The voice network will still be CDMA for a couple of more years though
VoLTE is available.

If she's not going to be using massive amounts of data tell her to
consider Boom which uses the Verizon network but is considerably less
expensive. $25/month for 1GB of data, $30/month for 2GB, all taxes and
fees included, and of course unlimited voice and SMS texts.
<https://www.boom.us/plans/individual>.

[Jolly Roger]

On 2017-04-25, Patty Winter <pat...@wintertime.com> wrote:
>
> In article <ema2d6...@mid.individual.net>,
> Jolly Roger <jolly...@pobox.com> wrote:
>>On 2017-04-25, Patty Winter <pat...@wintertime.com> wrote:
>>> A few follow-up questions:
>>>
>>> * Do they really charge $20 a month for something called a "line
>>> access charge"? That sure increases the cost of a $35/month plan!
>>
>>Yep. The $35/month is for the 2GB of data. The Line Access charge ($20
>>per phone) is what Verizon charges you to use their phone network.
>
> Wow, that makes it much more expensive. So she'd be better off paying
> $40/month for 2GB of data on Verizon's prepaid plan, right?

Hmm... I would think that plan would also have the line access fee. I'm
pretty sure all phones get that fee since it's paying for access to the
carrier network itself (someone can correct me if I'm wrong).

>>> * There's no mention of whether these plans involve contracts. Maybe
>>> they don't if you bring your own phone?
>>
>>I'm pretty sure you'd have to start a new contract with a new phone.
>>If she purchases the phone directly from Apple they will set it all up
>>for her. It's *way* less trouble when Apple does it. You can even do
>>it all straight from the Apple web site if you want.
>
> Do you mean that the Apple store folks can set up a Verizon plan?

Yep. And they handle it very well. Some carriers really suck at customer
service. Apple excels at it.

> I think my friend should call Verizon herself to find out whether she
> can get some kind of deal as a current customer. I doubt that Apple
> store people would know about that.

True. If there's no special deal, though, I'd get it straight from
Apple, personally.

[Patty Winter]

In article <250420171922304947%nos...@nospam.invalid>,

nospam <nos...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>In article <odokri$qdh$1...@dont-email.me>, Patty Winter
><pat...@wintertime.com> wrote:
>
>> Wow, that makes it much more expensive. So she'd be better off paying
>> $40/month for 2GB of data on Verizon's prepaid plan, right? Is there
>> some downside of a prepaid plan that I'm not seeing?
>
>it depends on usage. for some people, prepaid is cheaper. for others
>it's not.

But the two plans I mentioned both had 2GB of data and unlimited text
and talk, so the usage is the same.

>most prepaid is actually postpaid in disguise. you still choose a plan
>(e.g., 2g/mo) and pay that whether or not you use it, and if you go
>over, the overages can be rather steep.

Actually, the Verizon prepaid handles data overages the same way my
AT&T prepaid plan does: they throttle the data speed until you reach
the new month. Given that I don't expect my friend to be spending her
days watching Netflix on her iPhone, I can't imagine that she'd ever
hit that situation anyway.


Patty

[Patty Winter]

In article <emahco...@mid.individual.net>,

Jolly Roger <jolly...@pobox.com> wrote:
>On 2017-04-25, Patty Winter <pat...@wintertime.com> wrote:
>>
>> Wow, that makes it much more expensive. So she'd be better off paying
>> $40/month for 2GB of data on Verizon's prepaid plan, right?
>
>Hmm... I would think that plan would also have the line access fee. I'm
>pretty sure all phones get that fee since it's paying for access to the
>carrier network itself (someone can correct me if I'm wrong).

I saw no mention of line access charges for the prepaid plans, and when
I searched Verizon's website, there was an answer from their user forums
saying that indeed there aren't any. We'll check that with an official
Verizon person, but so far, I've seen nothing to indicate it.

>> Do you mean that the Apple store folks can set up a Verizon plan?
>
>Yep. And they handle it very well. Some carriers really suck at customer
>service. Apple excels at it.

Cool.

>> I think my friend should call Verizon herself to find out whether she
>> can get some kind of deal as a current customer. I doubt that Apple
>> store people would know about that.
>
>True. If there's no special deal, though, I'd get it straight from
>Apple, personally.

Given the explanation that "port in" means changing from another
carrier, she won't be eligible for that offer. There is a discount
offer on some iPhone models for prepaid plans. I'll run all those
options past her.


Patty

[Patty Winter]

In article <odp2f0$luq$1...@dont-email.me>,

sms <scharf...@geemail.com> wrote:
>The 6 stock will be quite old. Remember, Li-Ion batteries begin to lose
>capacity as soon as they are manufactured and a 6 could be more than two
>years old.
>
>You can buy an iPhone directly from Apple and there are some advantages
>to doing so. Also you can get a refurbished 6s which includes a new
>battery and is $100 less (but no Apple financing).

Okay, yes, I see some refurbished 6s models for $90 less than new. The
newer battery would be helpful.


Patty

[JF Mezei]

On 2017-04-25 23:55, Patty Winter wrote:

> Okay, yes, I see some refurbished 6s models for $90 less than new. The
> newer battery would be helpful.

As the 6s is still being manufactured, the batteries are new anyways.



Note: with prepaid plans, if there is an issue with your credit card,
your service stops. (can't draw funds to pay for more service). With
postpaid, the company will keep service on your line and give you time
to update your payment information.

Although this may not be an issue with Verizon, with T-Mobile, unless it
has changed, coverage is not the same with prepaid compared to postpaid.
Postpaid has access to areas covered bt AT&T only but when a prepaid
card tries to "log in" you get the signal, but not allowed to make
calls. (this was from 2010, and one reason I now choose AT&T when
traveling).

[Jolly Roger]

Patty Winter <pat...@wintertime.com> wrote:
>
> Given that I don't expect my friend to be spending her
> days watching Netflix on her iPhone, I can't imagine that she'd ever
> hit that situation anyway.

And she'd have to be watching Netflix while on cellular as opposed to WiFi
to count against that 2GB. ; )

[Jolly Roger]

Patty Winter <pat...@wintertime.com> wrote:
>
> In article <emahco...@mid.individual.net>,
> Jolly Roger <jolly...@pobox.com> wrote:
>> On 2017-04-25, Patty Winter <pat...@wintertime.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Wow, that makes it much more expensive. So she'd be better off paying
>>> $40/month for 2GB of data on Verizon's prepaid plan, right?
>>
>> Hmm... I would think that plan would also have the line access fee. I'm
>> pretty sure all phones get that fee since it's paying for access to the
>> carrier network itself (someone can correct me if I'm wrong).
>
> I saw no mention of line access charges for the prepaid plans, and when
> I searched Verizon's website, there was an answer from their user forums
> saying that indeed there aren't any. We'll check that with an official
> Verizon person, but so far, I've seen nothing to indicate it.

Ah ok. I wouldn't know; I've never done prepaid.

[Patty Winter]

In article <590039f8$0$43850$c3e8da3$5e5e...@news.astraweb.com>,

JF Mezei <jfmezei...@vaxination.ca> wrote:
>
>Although this may not be an issue with Verizon, with T-Mobile, unless it
>has changed, coverage is not the same with prepaid compared to postpaid.
>Postpaid has access to areas covered bt AT&T only but when a prepaid
>card tries to "log in" you get the signal, but not allowed to make
>calls. (this was from 2010, and one reason I now choose AT&T when
>traveling).

Verizon's coverage map has a different layer for prepaid, but when I
chose it, it looked a whole lot like the coverage map for 4G within
California, and I don't expect my friend to be traveling to eastern
Nevada. So yes, theoretically that could be an issue, but I don't
think it will be for her.


Patty

[Chris]

2G a month is quite a lot of data. Plenty for most people. I get by on
1G/month but then I have free WiFi on my commute.

[sms]

On 4/25/2017 8:51 PM, Patty Winter wrote:

<snip>

> Actually, the Verizon prepaid handles data overages the same way my
> AT&T prepaid plan does: they throttle the data speed until you reach
> the new month. Given that I don't expect my friend to be spending her
> days watching Netflix on her iPhone, I can't imagine that she'd ever
> hit that situation anyway.

With Boom you can either buy more data, or get a plan that throttles
data if you exceed your limit, or buy more data. The big advantage of
course is that it's on Verizon, and in the western U.S., especially
California and Oregon, that's an extremely big advantage because AT&T is
not nearly is good and T-Mobile is awful, in terms of coverage.

Also, the Boom price includes all taxes and fees, with Verizon postpaid
it can be another 18-22% additional, depending on location.

Also remember that a Verizon iPhone, or one directly from Apple, can be
used on AT&T as well, but the reverse is not true. It's best to buy a
phone directly from Apple if you're going to use AT&T since you'll a) be
able to switch carriers to Verizon later, and b) the resale value will
be higher than a model that lacks the CDMA radio.

[nospam]

In article <odr1q9$26o$1...@dont-email.me>, sms

<scharf...@geemail.com> wrote:

> Also remember that a Verizon iPhone, or one directly from Apple, can be
> used on AT&T as well, but the reverse is not true.

that's only for the iphone 7. it's not true at all for 6s and earlier,
and actually the at&t 6s is more universal than the verizon version
because it has band 30.

> It's best to buy a
> phone directly from Apple if you're going to use AT&T since you'll a) be
> able to switch carriers to Verizon later,

it doesn't matter where it's bought and people don't generally hop
carriers anyway.

> and b) the resale value will
> be higher than a model that lacks the CDMA radio.

not necessarily.

[Jolly Roger]

Chris <ithi...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Patty Winter <pat...@wintertime.com> wrote:
>>
>> Given that I don't expect my friend to be spending her
>> days watching Netflix on her iPhone, I can't imagine that she'd ever
>> hit that situation anyway.
>
> 2G a month is quite a lot of data. Plenty for most people.

Verizon rolls over unused data each month, too.

[sms]

And Nospam is wrong of course when he states "most prepaid is actually
postpaid in disguise." Most prepaid let you buy more data if you exceed
your usage, and it's not exorbitantly priced, though it's a little more
than if you signed up for a bigger plan initially.

[sms]

On 4/25/2017 11:11 PM, JF Mezei wrote:

> Although this may not be an issue with Verizon, with T-Mobile, unless it
> has changed, coverage is not the same with prepaid compared to postpaid.
> Postpaid has access to areas covered bt AT&T only but when a prepaid
> card tries to "log in" you get the signal, but not allowed to make
> calls. (this was from 2010, and one reason I now choose AT&T when
> traveling).

There are still a great many AT&T areas where T-Mobile lacks coverage
and you can't roam onto AT&T even with postpaid T-Mobile service.

[Patty Winter]

In article <odr98t$qns$1...@dont-email.me>,

sms <scharf...@geemail.com> wrote:
>
>Most prepaid let you buy more data if you exceed
>your usage, and it's not exorbitantly priced, though it's a little more
>than if you signed up for a bigger plan initially.

But apparently with Verizon, prepaid is actually *less* per month.
The plan rate is $5 higher (using 2GB as an example), but there's
no "line access charge" of $20.


Patty

[nospam]

In article <odr98t$qns$1...@dont-email.me>, sms
<scharf...@geemail.com> wrote:

> >>

> >>> most prepaid is actually postpaid in disguise. you still choose a plan
> >>> (e.g., 2g/mo) and pay that whether or not you use it, and if you go
> >>> over, the overages can be rather steep.
> >>
> >> Actually, the Verizon prepaid handles data overages the same way my
> >> AT&T prepaid plan does: they throttle the data speed until you reach
> >> the new month. Given that I don't expect my friend to be spending her
> >> days watching Netflix on her iPhone, I can't imagine that she'd ever
> >> hit that situation anyway.
> >
> > 2G a month is quite a lot of data. Plenty for most people. I get by on
> > 1G/month but then I have free WiFi on my commute.
>
> And Nospam is wrong of course when he states "most prepaid is actually
> postpaid in disguise." Most prepaid let you buy more data if you exceed
> your usage, and it's not exorbitantly priced, though it's a little more
> than if you signed up for a bigger plan initially.

i wasn't talking about buying more data than what is used, which can be
done on postpaid too.

the point is that there's no tangible difference in a prepaid plan
that's auto-billed to a credit card versus a similar postpaid plan with
a bill that's sent to you (and actually applies to *next* month, aka
prepaid), which can also be set to auto-pay via credit card (sometimes
with a discount).

either way, you're paying for a block of voice/text/data ahead of time,
regardless if you use all of it or very little.