Ordered iPhone 7+

[ElfinArc]

Verizon had a deal I just couldn't pass up! (AT&T has the same deal). I
get a credit of $650 to trade-in my iPhone 6+ against any iPhone 7.

So I ordered the 7+ in matte black, 128Gb. I don't use a lot of cell data
so got the 'small' data plan. I have 2Gb of data now, when the iPhone 7+
comes in, they will add 2Gb for life to the data plan for zero,nada, zip...

Here's how it breaks down:
IPhone 7+, 128GB = $869.99
Less iPhone 6+ = $650.00

Balance: $219.99 spread out over 24 months at zero interest. So about
$9/month.

Account:
2Gb (later 4Gb) = $29.75 (military discount applied)
Smartphone access = $20
Phone payment - about $9.17

So a bit less than $60/month plus taxes, fees and whatever else they can
think of (usually adds about 15% in Illinois)

--
Elfin

[Lewis]

In message <846620681.495250328.539...@news.individual.net>

ElfinArc <elfi...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Verizon had a deal I just couldn't pass up! (AT&T has the same deal). I
> get a credit of $650 to trade-in my iPhone 6+ against any iPhone 7.

That's basically T-Mobile's deal, but I will only pay $150 for my 7
Plus 128GB. We were also able to upgrade a 5S to a 7 for $250.

The phones moving from the 6 to 7 (non plus) are free.

--
If women wear a pair of pants, a pair of glasses, and a pair of
earrings, why don't they wear a pair of bras?

[Horace Algier]

On Sun, 11 Sep 2016 03:16:01 -0000 (UTC), Lewis wrote:

> That's basically T-Mobile's deal, but I will only pay $150 for my 7
> Plus 128GB. We were also able to upgrade a 5S to a 7 for $250.
>
> The phones moving from the 6 to 7 (non plus) are free.

Not exactly.

T-Mobile's deal was explained in a recent thread, where, in our case, we
would trade in a 64GB iPhone 6 for a 32 GB iPhone 7 (which may not be worth
the trade in given that there's nothing special about an iPhone 7 over an
iPhone 6 other than slightly improved CPU/RAM/Camera/Waterresistance and
there is one really bad thing about the iPhone 7 which is lost
functionality in the missing headphone jack).

In addition, California charges sales tax on the full MSRPP, so, a free
phone is literally impossible in California unless you get it from a friend
(as we did for the 64GB iPhone 6).

According to my calls to 611, the T-Mobile trade-in value of the iPhone 6
(any number of megabytes) is listed as a flat $165 so the deferred value of
the "free" 32GB iPhone 7 is listed as a $484.99 credit extended by Apple to
T-Mobile, where you pay 1/24th of that for two years with no
early-termination fees nor is a service contract required other than you
owe the full remaining value of the iPhone 7 at all times.

[Horace Algier]

I think it's great that you advise others on the Verizon deal since I
already advised on the T-Mobile deal.

Let us know if the Verizon phone *only* has CDMA (or if it has GSM also)
and whether it's unlocked or not - since we all know the previous phones
had both - but T-Mobile told me they weren't sure about the new iPhone 7.

I think it's interesting that both Apple MARKETING and you list the *color*
of the phone (as if it matters!) as the very first thing you note!
http://www.apple.com/iphone/compare/

I notice that the Illinois sales tax is very low, at only 6.25% but, do you
know if Illinois charges sales tax on the full MSRPP of the phone like
California does, or does Illinois only charge sales tax on what you
literally *paid* for the phone?

[ElfinArc]

Lewis <g.k...@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
> In message <846620681.495250328.539...@news.individual.net>
> ElfinArc <elfi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Verizon had a deal I just couldn't pass up! (AT&T has the same deal). I
>> get a credit of $650 to trade-in my iPhone 6+ against any iPhone 7.
>
> That's basically T-Mobile's deal, but I will only pay $150 for my 7
> Plus 128GB. We were also able to upgrade a 5S to a 7 for $250.
>
> The phones moving from the 6 to 7 (non plus) are free.
>

Same on Verizon and ATT, 6 to 7 (non plus) is free.

--
Elfin

[ElfinArc]

Horace Algier <hor...@horatio.net> wrote:
> On Sat, 10 Sep 2016 20:43:26 -0500, ElfinArc wrote:
>
>> Verizon had a deal I just couldn't pass up! (AT&T has the same deal). I
>> get a credit of $650 to trade-in my iPhone 6+ against any iPhone 7.
>>
>> So I ordered the 7+ in matte black, 128Gb. I don't use a lot of cell data
>> so got the 'small' data plan. I have 2Gb of data now, when the iPhone 7+
>> comes in, they will add 2Gb for life to the data plan for zero,nada, zip...
>>
>> Here's how it breaks down:
>> IPhone 7+, 128GB = $869.99
>> Less iPhone 6+ = $650.00
>>
>> Balance: $219.99 spread out over 24 months at zero interest. So about
>> $9/month.
>>
>> Account:
>> 2Gb (later 4Gb) = $29.75 (military discount applied)
>> Smartphone access = $20
>> Phone payment - about $9.17
>>
>> So a bit less than $60/month plus taxes, fees and whatever else they can
>> think of (usually adds about 15% in Illinois)
>
> I think it's great that you advise others on the Verizon deal since I
> already advised on the T-Mobile deal.
>
> Let us know if the Verizon phone *only* has CDMA (or if it has GSM also)
> and whether it's unlocked or not - since we all know the previous phones
> had both - but T-Mobile told me they weren't sure about the new iPhone 7.
>

All Verizon phones that do LTE have to be unlocked because of the deal they
made on some spectrum they bought. And Apple's site shows the CDMA version
of the phone has both CDMA and GSM. The reason the TMO version doesn't is
because it uses the Intel radio which doesn't support CDMA at all.

> I think it's interesting that both Apple MARKETING and you list the *color*
> of the phone (as if it matters!) as the very first thing you note!
> http://www.apple.com/iphone/compare/
>

Color is part and parcel of look and feel. For me if they didn't have the
glossy Jet Black I probably wouldn't have listed it.

> I notice that the Illinois sales tax is very low, at only 6.25% but, do you
> know if Illinois charges sales tax on the full MSRPP of the phone like
> California does, or does Illinois only charge sales tax on what you
> literally *paid* for the phone?
>

Most areas of Illinois have city sales tax too. In my case total sales tax
is 8.25%, and I think it is on the full price of the phone.


--
Elfin

[Horace Algier]

On Sun, 11 Sep 2016 08:00:34 -0500, ElfinArc wrote:

>> Let us know if the Verizon phone *only* has CDMA (or if it has GSM also)
>> and whether it's unlocked or not - since we all know the previous phones
>> had both - but T-Mobile told me they weren't sure about the new iPhone 7.
>>
> All Verizon phones that do LTE have to be unlocked because of the deal they
> made on some spectrum they bought. And Apple's site shows the CDMA version
> of the phone has both CDMA and GSM. The reason the TMO version doesn't is
> because it uses the Intel radio which doesn't support CDMA at all.

That's interesting, if I understood you correctly.

I know a kid who put a Verizon iPhone 6 on T-Mobile and it worked fine, but
it probably had the Qualcomm modem chip, which supports *both* CDMA & GSM.

What you're saying, I think, is that the T-Mobile iPhone 7 uses an Intel
modem chip which doesn't have CDMA.

I think that's confirmed by Apple here for the new iPhone 7 lack of CDMA:
http://www.apple.com/iphone-7/specs/

And lack of LTE:
http://www.apple.com/iphone/LTE/

>> I think it's interesting that both Apple MARKETING and you list the *color*
>> of the phone (as if it matters!) as the very first thing you note!
>> http://www.apple.com/iphone/compare/
>>
> Color is part and parcel of look and feel. For me if they didn't have the
> glossy Jet Black I probably wouldn't have listed it.

We may be different. To me, the color is so meaningless as to never factor
into the equation one bit. Certainly it would never be listed first, yet,
that's what Apple MARKETING does (in fact, they list the color TWICE in the
first two lines of their MARKETING literature).

So, color, while a completely meaningless parameter to most people, must be
a key (maybe even critical) factor for its customers because the one thing
I respect is that Apple MARKETING knows its customer!

If they list the color *twice* in the first set of lines (taking up the
best space on a web page visited by millions), then color must be a
critical factor to its customers.

Nobody knows MARKETING like Apple.

>> I notice that the Illinois sales tax is very low, at only 6.25% but, do you
>> know if Illinois charges sales tax on the full MSRPP of the phone like
>> California does, or does Illinois only charge sales tax on what you
>> literally *paid* for the phone?
>>
> Most areas of Illinois have city sales tax too. In my case total sales tax
> is 8.25%, and I think it is on the full price of the phone.

Yuck. Mine is in the same range. That's terrible. For both of us. In
California, the states doesn't care how much you actually pay for the phone
- you're always charged the tax on the MSRP which, I think, is also what
you're running into - even if the phone is free.

It seems the "trick" given the sales tax and the lack of CDMA/LTE in the
AT&T/T-Mobile phones is to trade in the phone in Texas to Verizon, and then
use it in Illinois or California on any carrier we want!

:)

[Horace Algier]

On Sun, 11 Sep 2016 08:00:33 -0500, ElfinArc wrote:

>> The phones moving from the 6 to 7 (non plus) are free.
>>
>
> Same on Verizon and ATT, 6 to 7 (non plus) is free.

Does anyone know the minimum *condition* of the old phone for Verizon and
AT&T?

For T-Mobile, the old phone must pass a 3-point (actually 4) inspection:

0. No 'find-my-iphone'
1. It must *look* undamaged (scuffed and scratched is ok)
2. The LDI sticker must be white (and not red)
3. The phone must power up

It doesn't matter, for T-Mobile, how much memory the phone had or if the
old phone was a Verizon phone or if you got it from a friend for free.

I suspect there is a fifth condition, which is that it must not be stolen,
but, I guess that's covered by the fact that we're already using it on
T-Mobile.

[Horace Algier]

On Sun, 11 Sep 2016 18:34:46 +0000 (UTC), Horace Algier wrote:

> We may be different. To me, the color is so meaningless as to never factor
> into the equation one bit. Certainly it would never be listed first, yet,
> that's what Apple MARKETING does (in fact, they list the color TWICE in the
> first two lines of their MARKETING literature).

Apparently the color matters even more than the waterproofing, where this
site puts color ahead of *everything* also!

http://www.cnet.com/news/iphone-7-should-you-upgrade/
What you get with the iPhone 7
- Jet- and matte-black color options

Later in the article, they compare the 6 with the 7, which is the
real-world comparison I'm making, and at least they put the color as the
second-most important decision-making factor, and not the first!

Summary: iPhone 6 to iPhone 7
If you need the latest and greatest Apple hardware, or you absolutely need
to step up your photography game, you may consider upgrading from the
iPhone 6. If those aren't essential to you, however, hold off updating
until the next iteration. The jump to the iPhone 7 is too incremental and
not worth the trouble.

What you get with the iPhone 7
a. Pressure-sensitive 3D Touch screen
b. Jet-black and rose-gold color options
c. Waterproofing
d. Home button's "taptic" vibrations
e. Optical image stabilization for 12-megapixel camera
f. 4K video recording
g. Better flash and Live Photos
h. 7-megapixel front-facing camera
i. Stereo speakers
j. Faster A10 Fusion processor and longer battery life

What's the same
a. Screen size and pixel density
b. Weight/size
c. Siri voice-assistant integration
d. Fingerprint sensor
e. Apple Pay

What you're losing when upgrading to iPhone 7
a. 3.5mm headphone jack

[nospam]

In article <nr4842$1tko$5...@gioia.aioe.org>, Horace Algier

<hor...@horatio.net> wrote:


> And lack of LTE:
> http://www.apple.com/iphone/LTE/

the iphone 7 does not lack lte.

it actually is among phones with best lte support, including advanced
lte.

[Savageduck]

On 2016-09-11 18:34:46 +0000, Horace Algier <hor...@horatio.net> said:

> On Sun, 11 Sep 2016 08:00:34 -0500, ElfinArc wrote:
>
>>> Let us know if the Verizon phone *only* has CDMA (or if it has GSM also)
>>> and whether it's unlocked or not - since we all know the previous phones
>>> had both - but T-Mobile told me they weren't sure about the new iPhone 7.
>>>
>> All Verizon phones that do LTE have to be unlocked because of the deal they
>> made on some spectrum they bought. And Apple's site shows the CDMA version
>> of the phone has both CDMA and GSM. The reason the TMO version doesn't is
>> because it uses the Intel radio which doesn't support CDMA at all.
>
> That's interesting, if I understood you correctly.
>
> I know a kid who put a Verizon iPhone 6 on T-Mobile and it worked fine, but
> it probably had the Qualcomm modem chip, which supports *both* CDMA & GSM.
>
> What you're saying, I think, is that the T-Mobile iPhone 7 uses an Intel
> modem chip which doesn't have CDMA.
>
> I think that's confirmed by Apple here for the new iPhone 7 lack of CDMA:
> http://www.apple.com/iphone-7/specs/

Get a Verizon or Sprint spec iPhone and it will cover all eventualities.

> And lack of LTE:
> http://www.apple.com/iphone/LTE/

What lack of LTE? That is a provider side issue.


--
Regards,

Savageduck

[Savageduck]

...but you still get to use your old headphones via the included
Lightning to 3.5mm adaptor. Nothing lost, or just use the included
Lightning EarBuds.

--
Regards,

Savageduck

[Savageduck]

...and VoLTE which works pretty darn well for me.

--
Regards,

Savageduck

[nospam]

In article <2016091112051645250-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom>,

Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:

> > What you're losing when upgrading to iPhone 7
> > a. 3.5mm headphone jack
>
> ...but you still get to use your old headphones via the included
> Lightning to 3.5mm adaptor. Nothing lost, or just use the included
> Lightning EarBuds.

yep.

[nospam]

In article <2016091112073963368-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom>,

Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:

> >
> >> And lack of LTE:
> >> http://www.apple.com/iphone/LTE/
> >
> > the iphone 7 does not lack lte.
> >
> > it actually is among phones with best lte support, including advanced
> > lte.
>
> ...and VoLTE which works pretty darn well for me.

that too.

i was referring to it having almost all lte bands, making it pretty
much universal.

[Horace Algier]

On Sun, 11 Sep 2016 14:55:06 -0400, nospam wrote:

> the iphone 7 does not lack lte.
>
> it actually is among phones with best lte support, including advanced
> lte.

I may have misread the LTE spec so thank you for pointing that out.

Here's a more complete story on the iPhone 7 LTE
http://www.phonearena.com/news/Rumor-comes-true-Intels-4G-LTE-modem-chip-is-inside-some-models-of-the-iPhone-7-and-iPhone-7-Plus_id85278

[JF Mezei]

>> All Verizon phones that do LTE have to be unlocked because of the deal they
>> made on some spectrum they bought. And Apple's site shows the CDMA version
>> of the phone has both CDMA and GSM. The reason the TMO version doesn't is
>> because it uses the Intel radio which doesn't support CDMA at all.

Verizon admitted a copuple years ago it wanted to shift away from CDMA
and go VoLTE ASAP because its phones costed more due to the need to pay
royalties to Qualcomm for proprietary CDMA tech. This puts Verizon at a
disadvantage against other networks who don't have to pay it.

While Apple put out hybrid phones in last couple of years, I suspect
that cost pressures now make it limit the use of Qualcomm chips only
when necessary and use lower cost GSM-only chips for all other phones.

(I believe some Samsung phones also had differenty chipset between USA
and rest of the world so rest of world didn't have to pay the Qualcomm
premium).




Note that in Canada, the former CDMA networks went a different route: in
2009/2010 they deployed 3G GSM so they could get the iPhone right away
and quickly stopped mareting any CDMA devices to their customers. The
CDMA network remained until now to serve "industriual" application such
as truck fleets, and GP on-Star which have almost finished their
migrtation to GSM. (and higher cost of devices doesn't impact the
carrier as that is paid by GM and trucking companies).


A few years who, Verizon seemed to think they could do the migration to
VoLTE very quickly. Obviouly not happening as fast as they thought.
(there are many technical issues with codec compatibility and server
farms needed to convert from their VoLTE codecs to POTS codecs to reach
landlines, connect to other mobile networks which mat have differeent
codecs (again, needing CPU to convert).

[Horace Algier]

On Sun, 11 Sep 2016 12:05:16 -0700, Savageduck wrote:

>> What you're losing when upgrading to iPhone 7
>> a. 3.5mm headphone jack
>
> ...but you still get to use your old headphones via the included
> Lightning to 3.5mm adaptor. Nothing lost, or just use the included
> Lightning EarBuds.

All I'm doing is *listing* what the article says.
They say it's "losing".
You say it's not losing.

OK.

Me?
I don't even own headphones.
But kids do.

[JF Mezei]

>> ...but you still get to use your old headphones via the included
>> Lightning to 3.5mm adaptor. Nothing lost, or just use the included
>> Lightning EarBuds.

Since the 7 comes with native lighning earbuds, the convenience factor
is very similar to the sony plugs of the past. Wired earbuids that plug
at the bottom of phone.

The change, which I have not tested is that isntead of having a plug on
the side, it has a plug in the middle.

I dislike the plug at bottom of phone as it interferes with how I hold
it (especially in winter). It isn't clear to me how the plug in middle
will change how one hold the iPhone.


But: running for the bus, if an wired earbud falls from ear, it stays
with me and I can continue to run. In the wireless case, it requires I
stop and look for it on the ground/grass, bend down, pick it up and
resume running for the bus. So the wired ones are more convenient.

On the other hand, without wires, less chances of the wire getting stuck
somewhere abnd pulling earbud out of ears.

Similarly, you have earbuds in ears, phone on desk, you turn around and
all of a sudden, your iphone is flying in the air and falls on ground
because the wired earbuds accelereated the phone as you turned around.
This woudln't ahppen with wireless ones.

[nospam]

In article <57d5b027$0$12030$c3e8da3$3a1a...@news.astraweb.com>, JF

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

> I dislike the plug at bottom of phone as it interferes with how I hold
> it (especially in winter). It isn't clear to me how the plug in middle
> will change how one hold the iPhone.

turn it over.

> But: running for the bus, if an wired earbud falls from ear, it stays
> with me and I can continue to run. In the wireless case, it requires I
> stop and look for it on the ground/grass, bend down, pick it up and
> resume running for the bus. So the wired ones are more convenient.

wear a headband or hat.

> On the other hand, without wires, less chances of the wire getting stuck
> somewhere abnd pulling earbud out of ears.

yep

> Similarly, you have earbuds in ears, phone on desk, you turn around and
> all of a sudden, your iphone is flying in the air and falls on ground
> because the wired earbuds accelereated the phone as you turned around.
> This woudln't ahppen with wireless ones.

that too.

[Horace Algier]

On Sun, 11 Sep 2016 12:01:27 -0700, Savageduck wrote:

> What lack of LTE? That is a provider side issue.

Thanks for pointing out my possible lte error:
http://cdn.macrumors.com/article-new/2016/09/iPhone-7-wireless.jpg

Perhaps I misread the information here?
http://fortune.com/2016/09/09/wireless-trade-offs-apple-iphone-7/

That article says "None of the new iPhones will be able to go online using
a spectrum band known as AWS-3 ... also known as LTE band 66."

Yet, macrumors says it's only CDMA that the T-mo & AT&T i7 lacks:
http://www.macrumors.com/2016/09/08/att-and-tmobile-iphone-7-models-lack-cdma/

So what's with the lack of LTE 66 then?

Anyway, seems to me, for resale value, we're better off with the Verizon
selection than with the AT&T or T-Mobile selection simply because the
Verizon iPhone 7 is more portable (hence higher resale and greater ability
to change carriers) than the iPhone 7 from T-Mobile and AT&T.

That is, if the iPhone 7 comes factory unlocked.
Does it?

The article only *implies* that the iPhone 7 is unlocked.

"Ultimately, the most obvious choice should be to purchase a Verizon or
Sprint model, even if you are an AT&T or T-Mobile customer, especially when
considering resale value. However, some customers may have difficulty
purchasing from another carrier, depending on their current status with
their existing carrier.

Apple should also release an unlocked SIM-free model in the U.S., likely
based on the Verizon/Sprint model, in a few weeks based on past launches."

[ElfinArc6]

Horace Algier <hor...@horatio.net> Wrote in message:

That is pretty much what Verizon wants too. Cracked screens won't
qualify unless the screen is replaced prior to trade-in.

--
Elfin

[nospam]

In article <nr4bjb$4mi$1...@gioia.aioe.org>, Horace Algier

<hor...@horatio.net> wrote:

>
> > What lack of LTE? That is a provider side issue.
>
> Thanks for pointing out my possible lte error:
> http://cdn.macrumors.com/article-new/2016/09/iPhone-7-wireless.jpg

now look at the parts you didn't outline in red.

> Perhaps I misread the information here?
> http://fortune.com/2016/09/09/wireless-trade-offs-apple-iphone-7/

you did, as you do a lot of things.

> That article says "None of the new iPhones will be able to go online using
> a spectrum band known as AWS-3 ... also known as LTE band 66."

so what. most phones don't support it.

> Yet, macrumors says it's only CDMA that the T-mo & AT&T i7 lacks:
> http://www.macrumors.com/2016/09/08/att-and-tmobile-iphone-7-models-lack-cdma/

that's correct.

> So what's with the lack of LTE 66 then?

unimportant.

[ElfinArc6]

Horace Algier <hor...@horatio.net> Wrote in message:

The 'trick' is that the deal is a 24 month deal with all of the
carriers. IOW, if you pay the phone off, trade it in later, or
get off their network before 24 months, you lose those credits.
A slick way to get you back into a 'contract' without an actual
contract like the subsidized deals were. For me that isn't a big
deal as I upgrade at the 2 year mark anyway, and Verizon is just
so good around here that going with someone else is just not a
good idea. AT&T comes close followed by T-Mobile and further
back, Sprint. Of course there are the MVNOs that resell the big
4, but they don't generally have the sweet hardware deals that
show up on occasion with the big 4.

I figure that $29.75 for 4Gb data is a bargain and the $650
trade-in deal is $400 more than Gazelle and the other trade-in
programs will give for a 6+ 64Gb model iPhone.

--
Elfin

[ElfinArc6]

Horace Algier <hor...@horatio.net> Wrote in message:

I'm not losing anything at all. Double the storage space of my
iPhone 6+ and it comes with flash ear buds and an adapter to use
3.5mm headphones, so that 'loss' is just pure BS.

--
Elfin

[ElfinArc6]

JF Mezei <jfmezei...@vaxination.ca> Wrote in message:

You realize the wireless earbuds are more than just earbuds
right? They are a complete headset with mic.
--
Elfin

[Savageduck]

On 2016-09-11 19:34:06 +0000, Horace Algier <hor...@horatio.net> said:

> On Sun, 11 Sep 2016 12:01:27 -0700, Savageduck wrote:
>
>> What lack of LTE? That is a provider side issue.
>
> Thanks for pointing out my possible lte error:
> http://cdn.macrumors.com/article-new/2016/09/iPhone-7-wireless.jpg
>
> Perhaps I misread the information here?
> http://fortune.com/2016/09/09/wireless-trade-offs-apple-iphone-7/
>
> That article says "None of the new iPhones will be able to go online using
> a spectrum band known as AWS-3 ... also known as LTE band 66."
>
> Yet, macrumors says it's only CDMA that the T-mo & AT&T i7 lacks:
> http://www.macrumors.com/2016/09/08/att-and-tmobile-iphone-7-models-lack-cdma/
>
> So what's with the lack of LTE 66 then?

Beats the Hell out of me considering that "LTE band 66" doesn't seem to
be in use in any of the countries where an iPhone can be bought and
used.
There appears to be LTE band 4 or AWS (no number given).

--
Regards,

Savageduck

[nospam]

In article <2016091113015381079-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom>,

Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:

> > So what's with the lack of LTE 66 then?
>
> Beats the Hell out of me considering that "LTE band 66" doesn't seem to
> be in use in any of the countries where an iPhone can be bought and
> used.

it's used only when driving on route 66 :)

[JF Mezei]

On 2016-09-11 15:34, Horace Algier wrote:

> Perhaps I misread the information here?
> http://fortune.com/2016/09/09/wireless-trade-offs-apple-iphone-7/

Band 66:
1710-1780 paired with 2110-2200 (Extended blocks AWS A-J).

Band 10:
1710-1770 paired with 2110-2170 Extended AWS blocks A-I)

Band 4
1710-1755 paired with 2110-2155 AWS blocks A-F


Iphone has neither 66 nor 10. But has band 4 (blocks A to F instead of A
to J).

I have no idea if this strategic by one of more large acriers to hirt
smaller carrier, or whether it is just a question of Apple having a
fixed number of frequencies it could activate and had to chop a few off
and decided AWS-3 was not yet sufficiently deployed to warrant killing
another frequency.

Remember when phones has single frequency ? then dual band and then tri
band to allow you to travel to Europe? Now, look at the number of
frequencies they need to support.

> Anyway, seems to me, for resale value, we're better off with the Verizon
> selection than with the AT&T or T-Mobile selection simply because the
> Verizon iPhone 7 is more portable

If you buy the CDMA model from Apple at full price, will Verizon agree
to activate it a year later? What about Sprint ? (not sure if Sprint
still refuses to activate BYOD CDMA phones).

If CDMA networks won't activate a "used" CDMA phone on their network,
then there is 0 value in having a CDMA capable iPhone, and you might as
well get the GSM-only model.

[nospam]

In article <57d5bc32$0$40493$b1db1813$796...@news.astraweb.com>, JF

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

>
> If you buy the CDMA model from Apple at full price, will Verizon agree
> to activate it a year later?

they're required by law to activate their own branded phones and
support any compatible phone (i.e., all lte).

> What about Sprint ? (not sure if Sprint
> still refuses to activate BYOD CDMA phones).

it depends.

> If CDMA networks won't activate a "used" CDMA phone on their network,
> then there is 0 value in having a CDMA capable iPhone, and you might as
> well get the GSM-only model.

it matters for those who want to use sprint/verizon.

[ElfinArc6]

JF Mezei <jfmezei...@vaxination.ca> Wrote in message:

Sprint has backed off of that a fair bit. They have a list of
phones they will authorize which includes most, if not all,
iPhones. Hell, Sprint is just now starting to use a universal
SIM instead of model specific ones. They are one strange company
in most respects.

--
Elfin

[JF Mezei]

On 2016-09-11 16:22, nospam wrote:

> they're required by law to activate their own branded phones and
> support any compatible phone (i.e., all lte).

When did that change ? I distinctly recall Sprint refusing to activate
CDMA handsets that were BYOD, you had to buy it from Sprint (or
authorized sales point such as Apple store) at time of activation.

[nospam]

In article <57d5be3e$0$31396$c3e8da3$dd96...@news.astraweb.com>, JF

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

>
> > they're required by law to activate their own branded phones and
> > support any compatible phone (i.e., all lte).
>
> When did that change ?

it's always been that way

> I distinctly recall Sprint refusing to activate
> CDMA handsets that were BYOD, you had to buy it from Sprint (or
> authorized sales point such as Apple store) at time of activation.

you snipped the part where you were asking about verizon.

[Rod Speed]

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

>>> ...but you still get to use your old headphones via
>>> the included Lightning to 3.5mm adaptor. Nothing
>>> lost, or just use the included Lightning EarBuds.

> Since the 7 comes with native lighning earbuds, the convenience
> factor is very similar to the sony plugs of the past. Wired earbuids
> that plug at the bottom of phone.

> The change, which I have not tested is that isntead of
> having a plug on the side, it has a plug in the middle.

> I dislike the plug at bottom of phone as it interferes with
> how I hold it (especially in winter). It isn't clear to me how
> the plug in middle will change how one hold the iPhone.

> But: running for the bus, if an wired earbud falls from ear,
> it stays with me and I can continue to run. In the wireless
> case, it requires I stop and look for it on the ground/grass,
> bend down, pick it up and resume running for the bus.

Not if you have enough of a clue to use a neckband headset,
it doesn’t come off and is even more convenient than wired
ear buds because there is no stupid wires getting in the way
and nothing plugged into the phone to get in the way of
your fingers either.

> So the wired ones are more convenient.

Wrong.

> On the other hand, without wires, less chances of the wire
> getting stuck somewhere abnd pulling earbud out of ears.

> Similarly, you have earbuds in ears, phone on desk, you turn around
> and all of a sudden, your iphone is flying in the air and falls on ground
> because the wired earbuds accelereated the phone as you turned around.
> This woudln't ahppen with wireless ones.

Yep, wireless is the only way to go.

[Horace Algier]

On Sun, 11 Sep 2016 16:18:57 -0400, JF Mezei wrote:

> If you buy the CDMA model from Apple at full price, will Verizon agree
> to activate it a year later?

What does "activate" mean in this sense?

I've put my T-Mobile SIM card in many a phone, and it just works.

What's this activation thing?

Since the iPhone 6 is a nanosim, just like the iPhone 7, all we'd do is
switch the nanoSIM from one phone to the other.

I don't know what you mean by "activation" since the SIM card is already
active.

Please advise as I appreciate that you're trying to help me understand
whether it will work.

[Horace Algier]

On Sun, 11 Sep 2016 14:45:48 -0500 (CDT), ElfinArc6 wrote:

> The 'trick' is that the deal is a 24 month deal with all of the
> carriers. IOW, if you pay the phone off, trade it in later, or
> get off their network before 24 months, you lose those credits.

Ah, but what if:
a. You have a friend in a no-sales-tax state
b. Who is on Verizon
c. Who is willing to take the 24-month risk

In that case, the iPhone 7 will never be *used* on the Verizon network but
will be used, instead, immediately on the T-Mobile network in another
state.

Can *that* be done?

> A slick way to get you back into a 'contract' without an actual
> contract like the subsidized deals were. For me that isn't a big
> deal as I upgrade at the 2 year mark anyway, and Verizon is just
> so good around here that going with someone else is just not a
> good idea. AT&T comes close followed by T-Mobile and further
> back, Sprint. Of course there are the MVNOs that resell the big
> 4, but they don't generally have the sweet hardware deals that
> show up on occasion with the big 4.

By most accounts I've read on the net, in the USA, very few people switch
carriers often.

I myself started with Verizon in the analog days, and dropped Verizon like
a hot potato when they re-instated my 2-year contract when I had a phone
replaced under warranty. I thought that was criminal.

Then I dropped AT&T about five (or so) years later, after complaining to
the FCC that they charged for a data plan that I didn't want (and which was
already blocked, at my request).

I've been happy with T-Mobile ever since.

The coverage, out here, as about the same (stinks for all three up in the
mountains, but all three give us, for free, cellular repeaters for our
homes).

> I figure that $29.75 for 4Gb data is a bargain and the $650
> trade-in deal is $400 more than Gazelle and the other trade-in
> programs will give for a 6+ 64Gb model iPhone.

I'm discussing a truly-free (i.e., no sales tax) Verizon iPhone 7 to then
use immediately on T-Mobile if Verizon doesn't insist on the phone actually
being used on *their* network (and if the Verizon iPhone 7 is unlocked) and
if that doesn't break any laws.

Technically, can that work?

[Horace Algier]

On Sun, 11 Sep 2016 14:40:25 -0500 (CDT), ElfinArc6 wrote:

> That is pretty much what Verizon wants too. Cracked screens won't
> qualify unless the screen is replaced prior to trade-in.

Thanks for confirming that, since we may want to trade the cracked-screen
iPhone 6 in to *Verizon* instead of to T-Mobile, simply because the Verizon
branded iPhone 7 (model A1660) is *better* than the T-Mobile branded iPhone
7 (model A1778).

Fixing the iPhone 6 cracked screen will be required, but after that, it
takes effort to get something truly for "free", so, I am working with the
idea with a good friend (whose kids I have given gift Android phones to in
the past) where he would get the phone for me on Verizon in a no-sales-tax
state.

Then he'd give me the phone for me to give to this kid.

For that truly free phone deal to work, it requires that Verizon not care
that the phone is never put on their network (and that the phone would
immediately work on the T-Mobile network).

[AL]

On 9/11/2016 12:45 PM, ElfinArc6 wrote:

> I figure that $29.75 for 4Gb data is a bargain

That would be a deal but don't you really mean 2GB?

2GB Verizon (Small Plan) = $35.
Military discount = 15% = $5.25
$35 - $5.25 = $29.75

[ElfinArc]

Your utter stupidity is astounding!

If you get the phone from Verizon on the deal and then don't activate and
use it on their network the deal is gone and you'll owe the full balance.
Or since you're seemingly ready to fuck your friend into going along with
this, he will end up on the hook.

--
Elfin

[ElfinArc]

Horace Algier <hor...@horatio.net> wrote:
> On Sun, 11 Sep 2016 14:45:48 -0500 (CDT), ElfinArc6 wrote:
>
>> The 'trick' is that the deal is a 24 month deal with all of the
>> carriers. IOW, if you pay the phone off, trade it in later, or
>> get off their network before 24 months, you lose those credits.
>
> Ah, but what if:
> a. You have a friend in a no-sales-tax state
> b. Who is on Verizon
> c. Who is willing to take the 24-month risk
>
> In that case, the iPhone 7 will never be *used* on the Verizon network but
> will be used, instead, immediately on the T-Mobile network in another
> state.
>
> Can *that* be done?
>

Beats me. But it does sound like a good way to end up in court.

Not sure, but I doubt it. It will come from Verizon and you can pretty
much bet your ass it won't work on anything else at that time. But since
it seems you want to break the rules of the deal I'm pretty sure what
you'll end up with is a phone that you will be paying full retail for and
no credits at all.

If you're going to do the deal with Verizon then just follow the rules that
give you that great deal. If you just are insistent you stay on T-Mobile,
then get the deal from them.


--
Elfin

[ElfinArc]

Starts out at 2Gb, but part of an upgrade these days with Verizon is that
they add 2Gb more that lasts for the life of the account. That would start
when the iPhone 7+ becomes part of my package.

--
Elfin

[AL]

On 9/11/2016 4:01 PM, ElfinArc wrote:

> Starts out at 2Gb, but part of an upgrade these days with Verizon is that
> they add 2Gb more that lasts for the life of the account. That would start
> when the iPhone 7+ becomes part of my package.

Ah. That is a good deal for you then.

I'm still paying $35 for 2GB. But since I seldom use more than 1GB even
a 20GB plan would offer no advantage to me. So I guess I'll just keep
the (wife's) 6+ and also my fingers and toes crossed.

[Horace Algier]

On Sun, 11 Sep 2016 15:42:24 -0400, nospam wrote:

>> So what's with the lack of LTE 66 then?
>
> unimportant.

OK. Thanks for clarifying the LTE 66 situation for the iPhone 7 as a non
issue.

[Horace Algier]

On Sun, 11 Sep 2016 15:17:41 -0400, JF Mezei wrote:

> Verizon admitted a copuple years ago it wanted to shift away from CDMA
> and go VoLTE ASAP because its phones costed more due to the need to pay
> royalties to Qualcomm for proprietary CDMA tech. This puts Verizon at a
> disadvantage against other networks who don't have to pay it.

Intel apparently purchased some "CDMA modem assets" in 2015:
http://www.fiercewireless.com/wireless/intel-continues-to-pare-mobile-losses-buys-cdma-modem-assets-from-via-telecom

"VIA Telecom will bring to Intel its CDMA technology ... this acquisition
... is expected to help Intel expand its ability to capture part of the
China 6-mode CDMA mobile market."

"Finally, Intel realized that it cannot be a major player in the LTE modem
market unless it also has a CDMA capability [where] CDMA is required for
any smartphone on Verizon's huge network".

BTW, is there any *technical* advantage of CDMA over GSM?

[nospam]

In article <nr50mg$125u$3...@gioia.aioe.org>, Horace Algier

<hor...@horatio.net> wrote:

>
> Intel apparently purchased some "CDMA modem assets" in 2015:
>
> http://www.fiercewireless.com/wireless/intel-continues-to-pare-mobile-losses-b
> uys-cdma-modem-assets-from-via-telecom
>
> "VIA Telecom will bring to Intel its CDMA technology ... this acquisition
> ... is expected to help Intel expand its ability to capture part of the
> China 6-mode CDMA mobile market."

china's cdma is not the same.

> "Finally, Intel realized that it cannot be a major player in the LTE modem
> market unless it also has a CDMA capability [where] CDMA is required for
> any smartphone on Verizon's huge network".

for now.

> BTW, is there any *technical* advantage of CDMA over GSM?

cdma has significant benefits over gsm, which is why hspa uses cdma for
its air interface and lte is essentially cdma on steroids.

[JF Mezei]

On 2016-09-11 18:07, Horace Algier wrote:
> On Sun, 11 Sep 2016 16:18:57 -0400, JF Mezei wrote:
>
>> If you buy the CDMA model from Apple at full price, will Verizon agree
>> to activate it a year later?
>
> What does "activate" mean in this sense?

CDMA protocol doesn't use SIM cards. The phone must be programmed at its
end, and the network programmed at its end to accept the phone.

[JF Mezei]

On 2016-09-11 18:15, Horace Algier wrote:
>
> Thanks for confirming that, since we may want to trade the cracked-screen
> iPhone 6 in to *Verizon* instead of to T-Mobile, simply because the Verizon
> branded iPhone 7 (model A1660) is *better* than the T-Mobile branded iPhone
> 7 (model A1778).

A phone that still support an ancient old protoclo shoudln't be
considered superior to the model that supports only current protocols.

Verizon and Sprint made the mistakes of not upgrading their CDMA to 3G
HSPA/UMTS and are now stuck with paying extra to support both CDMA and
GSM/LTE.

That bet may have worked if universal voice service had happened on LTE,
but it is still some time off before that can happen.

> Fixing the iPhone 6 cracked screen will be required, but after that, it
> takes effort to get something truly for "free"

Nothing is ever free. The trade-in value for the older iPhone is used
as downpayment for subsidized new phone along with a service contract
for 2 years of service during which you pay the subsidy back bit bt bit
every month.

[ElfinArc]

I don't use much cell data either, but on some occasions...

--
Elfin

[JF Mezei]

On 2016-09-11 19:01, ElfinArc wrote:

> If you get the phone from Verizon on the deal and then don't activate and
> use it on their network the deal is gone and you'll owe the full balance.

No. You only get the reduced price deal for the phone AFTER you have
committed to 2 years with of service. Verizon or any other carrier isn't
interested in selling you a phone below cost and see you skip town and
not pay the rest. (and then you sell that phone at discount from full
price and make hefty profit).

Yes, you could get phone from Verizon and the insert a T-Mobile SIM in
it, but then you would still get mnonthly invoice from Verizon for the
contract you committed to at time of purchase, as well as from T-Mobile
for the service you are using.

[nospam]

In article <57d60c22$0$29138$c3e8da3$3863...@news.astraweb.com>, JF

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

>
> CDMA protocol doesn't use SIM cards.

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Removable_User_Identity_Module>
Removable User Identity Module (R-UIM) is a card developed for
cdmaOne/CDMA2000 ("CDMA") handsets that extends the GSM SIM card to
CDMA phones and networks. To work in CDMA networks, the R-UIM
contains an early version of the CSIM application. The card also
contains SIM (GSM) application, so it can work on both networks. It
is physically compatible with GSM SIMs and can fit into existing GSM
phones as it is an extension of the GSM 11.11 standard.[1]

[nospam]

In article <57d60dd8$0$29547$c3e8da3$c8b7...@news.astraweb.com>, JF

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

>
> Verizon and Sprint made the mistakes of not upgrading their CDMA to 3G
> HSPA/UMTS and are now stuck with paying extra to support both CDMA and
> GSM/LTE.

nonsense.

the gsm carriers are still supporting 3g, some still supporting 2g
(although that's being shuttered).

> That bet may have worked if universal voice service had happened on LTE,
> but it is still some time off before that can happen.

it's happening *now*.

[ElfinArc]

Uh, no. The only contractual part of the deal is the purchase agreement
with monthly credits. There is no service contract at all.

--
Elfin

[Savageduck]

With my current Verizon data plan all my unused data is rolled over and
accumulates. At the start of the current cycle I show 7.47GB available.
I think I have a pretty good data cushion.
--
Regards,

Savageduck

[Rod Speed]

"Horace Algier" <hor...@horatio.net> wrote in message
news:nr50mg$125u$3...@gioia.aioe.org...

Yep, GSM has a distance digital cliff, CDMA doesn’t.

Normally only matters where the density of bases is low.

[JF Mezei]

On 2016-09-11 21:34, Horace Algier wrote:

> BTW, is there any *technical* advantage of CDMA over GSM?

you need to differentiate between CDMA and cdma.

CDMA is a proprietary implemenetation by Qualcomm (protocol IS-95) of a
network that uses a cdma air interface.


GSM 2G used a tdma air interface (time division multiple access).
GSM 3G and 4G use cdma air interface (code division multiple access)

tdma provides garanteed quality since each channel has its own time slot
and nobody else talks during that time slot.

cdma is basically technoplogy that lets you listen to a single person in
a crowd of people taking at same time. But when too many people talk at
same time, you may have problems picking up a single person's signals
and voice may break up. But it allows one to support much hyigher number
of people per frequency band than with tdma.

Qualcomm's CDMA essentially stopped at 2.5G speeds (though marketed as
3G). GSM's 3G (HSPA for data and UMTS for voice) offer far superior
speeds than the old CDMA.

Although both use a cdma air interface, the GSM implementation uses
wider channels, better voice codecs and compression than the older CDMA
whose development stopped.

CDMA topped out at about 3mbps while GSM with LTE now offers about
450mbps. (HSPA for 3G had about 45mbps).

The wider the channel, the more efficient the compression can be.

Consider this. If you have 1 hz channel of light, at each second, you
can transit either light or no light (1 bit per baud).

But if for each cycle, you can transmit no light, red light, green light
or blue light, then you have 4 possible values per cycle or 2 bits. you
have doubled your capacity.

And if you can transmit combinations of lights, you then have

black
red
green
blue
red-green
red-blue
blue-green
red-green-blue

So instead of transmitting 1 or 0 (1 bit) you are now able to transmit 8
possible values (3 bits) and have trippled your throughput.

This is why the ability to combine channels in LTE is such a big thing
because once channel of 10mhz can compressss far more bits per hertz
than 2 channels of 5mhz.

Initial "combinations" on LTE were for adjacent channels eg: A+B and
the more advanced LTE version can now combine channels that are not
adjacent. (eg: A+C).


the IS-95 CDMA is basically the 1200 baud dial-up of wireless while LTE
today liek like fibre to the home.


Where Verizon was able to stay in business is that the air interface is
one aspect, but the link between the antennas and the central office is
another one and this is where AT&T faltered big time and while the air
interface was 3G and capable of over 40mbps, its links on the ground
were grossly underprovisioned and on average provided less than 3mbps
throughput per user (so Verizon stayed faster for some time because of
AT&T incompetence on ground).

[JF Mezei]

On 2016-09-11 21:45, nospam wrote:

> cdma has significant benefits over gsm, which is why hspa uses cdma for
> its air interface and lte is essentially cdma on steroids.

pedantic:

cdma has significant advantages over tdma which was used for 2G version
of GSM which then migrated to cdma for 3G and 4G.

[AL]

I have Carryover Data (Verizon's term) too and my cushion is up over 3GB
now. Though if I don't use it during the next month it goes away (yours
too). So though it has a nice sound, it probably won't make much of a
difference for me. YMMV.

http://www.verizonwireless.com/support/carryover-data-faqs/

[Chris]

JF Mezei <jfmezei...@vaxination.ca> wrote:
>
>>> ...but you still get to use your old headphones via the included
>>> Lightning to 3.5mm adaptor. Nothing lost, or just use the included
>>> Lightning EarBuds.
>
> Since the 7 comes with native lighning earbuds, the convenience factor
> is very similar to the sony plugs of the past. Wired earbuids that plug
> at the bottom of phone.
>
> The change, which I have not tested is that isntead of having a plug on
> the side, it has a plug in the middle.
>
> I dislike the plug at bottom of phone as it interferes with how I hold
> it (especially in winter). It isn't clear to me how the plug in middle
> will change how one hold the iPhone.
>
>
> But: running for the bus, if an wired earbud falls from ear, it stays
> with me and I can continue to run. In the wireless case, it requires I
> stop and look for it on the ground/grass, bend down, pick it up and

> resume running for the bus. So the wired ones are more convenient.

>
> On the other hand, without wires, less chances of the wire getting stuck
> somewhere abnd pulling earbud out of ears.
>
> Similarly, you have earbuds in ears, phone on desk, you turn around and
> all of a sudden, your iphone is flying in the air and falls on ground
> because the wired earbuds accelereated the phone as you turned around.
> This woudln't ahppen with wireless ones.

Has there been any mention of what they actually *sound* like? I find the
current Apple ear phones atrocious and have only ever used them once. Much
prefer my sennheiser ear buds.

The features in the earpods are really impressive, but if they sound
terrible they're just a waste of space.

[Horace Algier]

On Sun, 11 Sep 2016 18:01:21 -0500, ElfinArc wrote:

> Not sure, but I doubt it. It will come from Verizon and you can pretty
> much bet your ass it won't work on anything else at that time. But since
> it seems you want to break the rules of the deal I'm pretty sure what
> you'll end up with is a phone that you will be paying full retail for and
> no credits at all.
>
> If you're going to do the deal with Verizon then just follow the rules that
> give you that great deal. If you just are insistent you stay on T-Mobile,
> then get the deal from them.

The only reason to do the deal with Verizon is that their phone is better
than a T-Mobile phone.

[Horace Algier]

On Sun, 11 Sep 2016 22:38:11 -0400, JF Mezei wrote:

> Verizon stayed faster for some time because of
> AT&T incompetence on ground).

Very interesting.
Thanks!

I last had Verizon more than a decade or so ago.

They were fine then, but then I got mad at them (for restarting my contract
when my Kyocera "smart" phone was replaced under warranty). So I dropped
them the day the newly upped contract expired.

(I would have dropped them immediately had the no-risk switchover deals
existed then.)

I complained to the FCC who did nothing that I know of.

Then I switched to AT&T and was happy, until my Blackberry clit stopped
working. By then, "data" came of age, and AT&T forced people to have a data
plan even if they had data blocked (which I did at the time).

So I dropped AT&T the very second the contract expired, and went to
T-mobile, who, at the time, was happy to allow me to have no data.

I complained to the FCC who had a VP at AT&T tell me the dumbest things
(i.e., a smart phone is useless without data, she said); then the FCC said
AT&T said they "resolved" the issue to my satisfaction. (Yeah, I dropped
them.)

I've been on T-Mobile ever since.
T-Mobile gives me free data (sort of) and they started at 1GB, and I only
use kilobytes, so they upped it to 2.5 GB (and I still only use kilobytes)
so now, just this week, they upped it to 3.5 GB (and I still only use
kilobytes).

BTW, is *everyone* on T-Mobile constantly getting free upgrades of the data
limit before throttling? Or only people like me, who don't need it or use
it?

[Horace Algier]

On Mon, 12 Sep 2016 12:33:31 +1000, Rod Speed wrote:

> Yep, GSM has a distance digital cliff, CDMA doesn¢t.

Interesting.
Thanks.

I'm considering a CDMA/GSM iPhone 7 for the kid, just because it seems like
a better deal than a GSM-only iPhone 7.

[Horace Algier]

On Sun, 11 Sep 2016 21:45:15 -0400, nospam wrote:

> cdma has significant benefits over gsm, which is why hspa uses cdma for
> its air interface and lte is essentially cdma on steroids.

Thanks for the advice.
Much appreciated.

[Horace Algier]

On Sun, 11 Sep 2016 22:00:02 -0400, JF Mezei wrote:

> CDMA protocol doesn't use SIM cards. The phone must be programmed at its
> end, and the network programmed at its end to accept the phone.

Ah. CDMA activation!

I have had T-Mobile "activate" a *new* SIM card when we switched a kid's
Nexus 5 (micro SIM) to the iPhone 6 (nano SIM); but I never had to
"activate" an existing switch of the same-size SIM from one phone to
another.

But Verizon "is" different!

So thanks for reminding me that CDMA *must* be activated.

That means my current strategy of getting a free Verizon iPhone 7 requires
"activation" on the Verizon network.

Luckily, that seems to be easy.
I think this is legal.

Bearing in mind that any fool can pay to get something, and that it takes
intelligence (and risk) to get it legally for free, do you see this as
legal and viable?

1. Friend in no-tax state trades in "my" iPhone 6 for a Verizon iPhone 7
2. Friend activates it on Verizon & unlocks it after 40 days
3. Friend sends new iPhone 7 to me

Is that viable?
Is that legal?

[Horace Algier]

On Mon, 12 Sep 2016 07:23:01 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote:

> Has there been any mention of what they actually *sound* like?

Who cares about sound?
It's *style* that matters!

:)

[Horace Algier]

On Sun, 11 Sep 2016 22:24:09 -0400, nospam wrote:

>> Verizon and Sprint made the mistakes of not upgrading their CDMA to 3G
>> HSPA/UMTS and are now stuck with paying extra to support both CDMA and
>> GSM/LTE.
>
> nonsense.

I think I agree with you in that the Verizon iPhone 6 is actually *better*
than the T-Mobile iPhone 7.

[Horace Algier]

On Sun, 11 Sep 2016 22:07:18 -0400, JF Mezei wrote:

> Nothing is ever free. The trade-in value for the older iPhone is used
> as downpayment for subsidized new phone along with a service contract
> for 2 years of service during which you pay the subsidy back bit bt bit
> every month.

Nothing is ever free?

We got the iPhone 6 completely for free.
We never even paid for a SIM card.

It's free, if we don't mind the cracked screen, anyway.
:)

And we can get an iPhone 7 for "just as free".
(Well, we have to fix the cracked screen - so it will cost about $10 or so
to replace the cracked screen.)

[Horace Algier]

On Sun, 11 Sep 2016 18:01:21 -0500, ElfinArc wrote:

> Your utter stupidity is astounding!

>
> If you get the phone from Verizon on the deal and then don't activate and
> use it on their network the deal is gone and you'll owe the full balance.

> Or since you're seemingly ready to fuck your friend into going along with
> this, he will end up on the hook.

T-Mobile requires the phone to be on their network for only 1.5 billing
cycles.

That is 40 days.

After that, they don't care.
They will unlock the phone at that point.

Of course, the billing credits last for 2 years on the original bill.
So, you need a friend willing to do that for you (which I have, for
Verizon).

[Horace Algier]

On Sun, 11 Sep 2016 22:12:19 -0400, JF Mezei wrote:

> No. You only get the reduced price deal for the phone AFTER you have
> committed to 2 years with of service. Verizon or any other carrier isn't
> interested in selling you a phone below cost and see you skip town and
> not pay the rest. (and then you sell that phone at discount from full
> price and make hefty profit).
>
> Yes, you could get phone from Verizon and the insert a T-Mobile SIM in
> it, but then you would still get mnonthly invoice from Verizon for the
> contract you committed to at time of purchase, as well as from T-Mobile
> for the service you are using.

I called up T-Mobile to ask them the exact question in reverse.

I asked them if I traded in an iPhone 6 for a T-Mobile iPhone 7, and then
*never* used it on the T-Mobile network, what would happen.

They told me very clearly that it would work, but only after 40 days.

That is, they *require* the phone to be on their network for 1.5 billing
cycles, before they will *unlock* the iPhone 7 to work on Verizon's
network.

Since a T-Mobile iPhone 7 is *worse* than a Verizon iPhone 7, the deal
needs to work in reverse.

That is you find a friend on Verizon in a no-tax state (which is easy if
you have given their kids free phones in the past).

1. THEY trade your iPhone 6 for a Verizon iPhone 7.
2. They use the iPhone 7 & unlock after 40 days.
3. After 40 days, they give you the phone.

Do you see any reasons why that wouldn't work?
Do you see any illegalities?

NOTE: It's easy to *pay* for something; any fool can do that.
It takes intelligence to get it legally for free.

[Horace Algier]

On Sun, 11 Sep 2016 21:29:46 -0500, ElfinArc wrote:

> Uh, no. The only contractual part of the deal is the purchase agreement
> with monthly credits. There is no service contract at all.

Exactly.

I called T-Mobile and told them who I was and what I wanted to do.

They told me it would be perfectly legal and would work if I kept the phone
on their network for 40 days prior to asking for it to be unlocked.

That's pretty much the only constraint other than being a T-Mobile customer
for two years from the trade-in date.

[ElfinArc]

Sure. But when the 'friend' unlocks it after 40 days the full retail
balance will be owed and must be paid or Verizon won't release the phone.
Suddenly that $650 deal has a value of $650/24 minus one payment. Oh no!
It wouldn't be that either. The credits don't actually show up until the
3rd payment so the full retail would be due and payable.

But yeah, your attempt to game the system is perfectly legal. How viable
is paying full retail?

--
Elfin

[ElfinArc]

Here's the deal with Verizon:
Sign up for Mobile Share 2Gb = $35/month
Phone access = $20/month

When you upgrade to the iPhone 7 the data doubles to 4Gb. With rollover
data and slower data after the high speed limit is reached. So for $55 a
month, plus fees and taxes, you have great service with better nationwide
coverage and is similar in most respects to T-Mobile. I think T-Mobile is
$50/month for their basic deal, plus the usual fees and taxes.


--
Elfin

[ElfinArc]

Horace Algier <hor...@horatio.net> wrote:
> On Mon, 12 Sep 2016 12:33:31 +1000, Rod Speed wrote:
>

>> Yep, GSM has a distance digital cliff, CDMA doesnąt.

>
> Interesting.
> Thanks.
>
> I'm considering a CDMA/GSM iPhone 7 for the kid, just because it seems like
> a better deal than a GSM-only iPhone 7.
>

The only real disadvantage to a GSM only phone is that it won't work on
Verizon or Sprint, or the MVNOs that resell them. In your case, T-Mobile
seems to be a good deal for you, so it shouldn't be a big deal at all.

--
Elfin

[ElfinArc]

So then your choice is:
1. Get the Verizon phone and stay with Verizon for the 2 years and get the
$650 deal
2. Get the Verizon phone and pay the full price up front in cash and use it
wherever you want to.


--
Elfin

[ElfinArc]

Bullshit! T-Mobile, like the other carriers with their trade-in/up, zero
interest payment plans won't release the phone until it is fully paid for.

--
Elfin

[nospam]

In article <nr9876$1tso$9...@gioia.aioe.org>, Horace Algier

<hor...@horatio.net> wrote:

>
> >> Verizon and Sprint made the mistakes of not upgrading their CDMA to 3G
> >> HSPA/UMTS and are now stuck with paying extra to support both CDMA and
> >> GSM/LTE.
> >
> > nonsense.
>
> I think I agree with you in that the Verizon iPhone 6 is actually *better*
> than the T-Mobile iPhone 7.

i didn't any such thing.

[nospam]

In article <nr9872$1tso$7...@gioia.aioe.org>, Horace Algier

<hor...@horatio.net> wrote:

> I have had T-Mobile "activate" a *new* SIM card when we switched a kid's
> Nexus 5 (micro SIM) to the iPhone 6 (nano SIM); but I never had to
> "activate" an existing switch of the same-size SIM from one phone to
> another.

that sim card had to be activated at some point.

> But Verizon "is" different!

no they're not.

> So thanks for reminding me that CDMA *must* be activated.

everything must be activated. you don't just get a phone and expect it
to work out of the box.

[Horace Algier]

On Tue, 13 Sep 2016 11:48:48 -0500, ElfinArc wrote:

>> T-Mobile requires the phone to be on their network for only 1.5 billing
>> cycles.
>>
>> That is 40 days.
>>
>> After that, they don't care.
>> They will unlock the phone at that point.
>>
>> Of course, the billing credits last for 2 years on the original bill.
>> So, you need a friend willing to do that for you (which I have, for
>> Verizon).
>>
>
> Bullshit! T-Mobile, like the other carriers with their trade-in/up, zero
> interest payment plans won't release the phone until it is fully paid for.

You're just guessing.
Anyone can guess.
Ask nospam - he's an expert at "just guessing".

I'm only telling you exactly what T-mobile told me.
If you don't believe it, you can call T-Mobile yourself.
So can anyone else.

If I'm wrong, *someone* will call T-Mobile and ask them and they can report
back here that I'm wrong. In fact, lots of someone's will do that, since
the deal I uncovered (using intelligence & effort) sure does seem too good
to be true.

But I find these types of deals all the time.
That's because I am intelligent. And I use forethought.

BTW, I'm perfectly fine with being wrong but I heard it from T-mobile
themselves so, as far as I know, I'm not wrong.

I told you where I got my facts.
Where did *you* get your facts?

Did *you* hear it from T-mobile?
Or are you just guessing (as always)?

Or, maybe you're upset because you paid for something you could have gotten
for free had you used a modicum of forethought?

[Horace Algier]

On Tue, 13 Sep 2016 11:39:44 -0500, ElfinArc wrote:

> Sure. But when the 'friend' unlocks it after 40 days the full retail
> balance will be owed and must be paid or Verizon won't release the phone.

I understand that risk.
That's *not* what T-Mobile told me.

That's why I reported it here.
I haven't called Verizon yet though, so that remains the question.

Remember, any fool can do *exactly* what Apple/T-Mobile/Verizon MARKETING
wants them to do.

That doesn't take any brains whatsoever.

[Horace Algier]

On Tue, 13 Sep 2016 13:00:17 -0400, nospam wrote:

>> I think I agree with you in that the Verizon iPhone 6 is actually *better*
>> than the T-Mobile iPhone 7.
>
> i didn't any such thing.

That was a typo.

I had meant the CDMA/GSM iPhone 7 is better than the GSM-only iPhone 7.
My mistake.

[ElfinArc]

As usual, you are full of shit. But go ahead and get the iPhone 7 on the
'deal' and then drop that carrier after the 40 days. At that point in time
you or the friend you fucked into assuming responsibility, will either pay
off the full retail balance owed or the iPhone 7 will become a really neat
brick.

--
Elfin

[JF Mezei]

On 2016-09-13 12:06, Horace Algier wrote:
> On Mon, 12 Sep 2016 12:33:31 +1000, Rod Speed wrote:
>
>> Yep, GSM has a distance digital cliff, CDMA doesn¢t.

The 30km distance limit was valid for both GSM 2G and the old TDMA
(IS-136) used by AT&T and a few other telcos in USA and Cantel/Rogers
in canada.

the tdma interface works with time division. So a phone is given a time
slot. When phone is too far (more than 30km), the travel time for the
signal means that by the time it arrives at destination, the destination
is already processing data for the next time slot instead of the time
slot assigned to that phone.

With GSM 3G and LTE, this limitation was removed as both use a cdma air
interface.

[Horace Algier]

On Tue, 13 Sep 2016 13:00:19 -0400, nospam wrote:

>> I have had T-Mobile "activate" a *new* SIM card when we switched a kid's
>> Nexus 5 (micro SIM) to the iPhone 6 (nano SIM); but I never had to
>> "activate" an existing switch of the same-size SIM from one phone to
>> another.
>
> that sim card had to be activated at some point.

I agree that at "some" point, the SIM card had to be "activated" on
T-Mobile.

I am so used to just swapping "my" SIM card into any phone I feel like
putting it into, that I forget that "activation" happened years ago.

>> But Verizon "is" different!
>
> no they're not.

Someone said that Verizon *was* different in that the new iPhone 7 would
have to be *activated* on Verizon's network, whereas a new iPhone7 would
*not* have to be activated on T-Mobile's network.

Notice we're talking real world here, so we're asking about an *existing*
plan with *existing* activated SIM cards, and not a brand new plan with
brand new SIM cards.

>> So thanks for reminding me that CDMA *must* be activated.
>
> everything must be activated. you don't just get a phone and expect it
> to work out of the box.

Huh?
If I am handed an iPhone 7 by T-Mobile, I don't have to "activate" it.
I just pop the nano SIM card out of the old phone and pop it into the new
phone and it will work just fine.

I've popped my SIM card into so many phones that I can't count how many
times I've done that.

It's always funny talking to you because you don't live in the real world.
What are you implying won't work about that real-world process?

[Horace Algier]

On Tue, 13 Sep 2016 11:39:43 -0500, ElfinArc wrote:

> The only real disadvantage to a GSM only phone is that it won't work on
> Verizon or Sprint, or the MVNOs that resell them. In your case, T-Mobile
> seems to be a good deal for you, so it shouldn't be a big deal at all.

I agree that T-Mobile will work for us, but this kid *trades* stuff with
other kids, and I'm only trying to use intelligent forethought to ensure
the trade-in capital is viable two years down the road.

For *that*, a (truly) free Verizon iPhone 7 is (slightly) more valuable
than a (truly) free T-Mobile iPhone 7 simply because an unlocked CDMA/GSM
phone is (slightly) more valuable than an unlocked GSM-only phone.

[JF Mezei]

On 2016-09-13 12:08, Horace Algier wrote:

> T-Mobile requires the phone to be on their network for only 1.5 billing
> cycles.

And you really think that you're off the hook after 1.5 months? You
really think that T-Mobile will give you a phone worth $600, bill you
1.5 months of service and let you go to a competing carrier ?

Hint: if you unlock the phone after 1.5 months, there are likely
unlocking fees associated. And if you then cancel your service with
T-Mobile, the contract camncellation fee kicks in to ensure that you end
up paying for the phone in full.

When you do the math, you will find that this will end up costing you
far more than walking to an Apple store and buying an unlocked iPhone
without any contract.

There really is no free iPhone. Either way you have to pay for it. If
you buy direct from Apple, you have no contract cancellation fees, you
have no unlocking fees.

[Horace Algier]

On Tue, 13 Sep 2016 11:39:43 -0500, ElfinArc wrote:

> I think T-Mobile is
> $50/month for their basic deal, plus the usual fees and taxes.

I pay T-Mobile $100/month (+government stuff) for 4 phones, unlimited talk
and text and free USA calls (and a decent price for International calls
which only matters when I travel).

In addition, T-Mobile "gives" me (currently) 3.5GB/month per phone of
"free" data, which we never use (we're in the kilobyte range all the time).

The data isn't shared.
The data does not roll over.

After that 3.5GB, they *never* charge more - they just throttle you
(supposedly); but you can also "buy" data (but I never even get close).

And, there is no contract whatsoever and we can use any phone we want (as I
switch my SIM card into other phones all the time).

In addition, we get free 200MB/month data on any tablet we want, with free
SIM cards (some people pay for the SIM card but I never have paid for them
yet).

Sometimes, especially when traveling, I use up those 200MB/month, but I
just switch SIM cards between the two tablets that I own, to get,
effectively, 400MB for that tablet for that month.

Normally I forget to switch the SIM card back, and nothing happens.
The next month, *both* tablets get their allotted 200MB per month again.

How does *that* T-Mobile deal compare with yours?

[nospam]

In article <nr9bs5$6i7$1...@gioia.aioe.org>, Horace Algier

<hor...@horatio.net> wrote:

>
> >> I have had T-Mobile "activate" a *new* SIM card when we switched a kid's
> >> Nexus 5 (micro SIM) to the iPhone 6 (nano SIM); but I never had to
> >> "activate" an existing switch of the same-size SIM from one phone to
> >> another.
> >
> > that sim card had to be activated at some point.
>
> I agree that at "some" point, the SIM card had to be "activated" on
> T-Mobile.
>
> I am so used to just swapping "my" SIM card into any phone I feel like
> putting it into, that I forget that "activation" happened years ago.

it's time to remember.

> >> But Verizon "is" different!
> >
> > no they're not.
>
> Someone said that Verizon *was* different in that the new iPhone 7 would
> have to be *activated* on Verizon's network, whereas a new iPhone7 would
> *not* have to be activated on T-Mobile's network.

that's not what someone said.

> Notice we're talking real world here, so we're asking about an *existing*
> plan with *existing* activated SIM cards, and not a brand new plan with
> brand new SIM cards.

it's going to need a brand new sim card.

> >> So thanks for reminding me that CDMA *must* be activated.
> >
> > everything must be activated. you don't just get a phone and expect it
> > to work out of the box.
>
> Huh?
> If I am handed an iPhone 7 by T-Mobile, I don't have to "activate" it.
> I just pop the nano SIM card out of the old phone and pop it into the new
> phone and it will work just fine.
>
> I've popped my SIM card into so many phones that I can't count how many
> times I've done that.
>
> It's always funny talking to you because you don't live in the real world.
> What are you implying won't work about that real-world process?

you've been told what will happen, but you refuse to listen.

go try it. you'll find out soon enough.

[nospam]

In article <nr9c0b$6qi$1...@gioia.aioe.org>, Horace Algier

not significantly, especially in a couple of years.

[Horace Algier]

On Tue, 13 Sep 2016 11:39:42 -0500, ElfinArc wrote:

> So then your choice is:
> 1. Get the Verizon phone and stay with Verizon for the 2 years and get the
> $650 deal
> 2. Get the Verizon phone and pay the full price up front in cash and use it
> wherever you want to.

Or, if it will work, I do some homework and use a modicum of intelligence
to get that Verizon iPhone 7 for the cost of repairing a cracked screen on
the Verizon iPhone 6...

[JF Mezei]

On 2016-09-13 13:00, nospam wrote:

>> But Verizon "is" different!
>
> no they're not.

With GSM, wireless service is tied to the SIM card. You can move your
SIM card from phone to phone and your subscription follows you. The SIM
card also contains the encryption keys for the communication. (and prior
to smartphones, the SIM card also contained all of your personal info
such as name, phone number, contacts, SMS messages sent/received, so
moving from one phone to the next was totally transparent).

With the CDMA service, there is no SIM card, so the subscription
information has to be programmed into the phone and is tied to that phone.

> everything must be activated. you don't just get a phone and expect it
> to work out of the box.

Yes for GSM. The phone need not be activated, you just insert an
existing SIM card in it. And when you travel you can insert another
network's SIM card in your phone. (provided it is not locked).

[nospam]

In article <57d83519$0$25149$c3e8da3$e408...@news.astraweb.com>, JF

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

>
> >> But Verizon "is" different!
> >
> > no they're not.
>
> With GSM, wireless service is tied to the SIM card. You can move your
> SIM card from phone to phone and your subscription follows you. The SIM
> card also contains the encryption keys for the communication. (and prior
> to smartphones, the SIM card also contained all of your personal info
> such as name, phone number, contacts, SMS messages sent/received, so
> moving from one phone to the next was totally transparent).
>
> With the CDMA service, there is no SIM card, so the subscription
> information has to be programmed into the phone and is tied to that phone.

cdma and gsm are history. they are now a *fallback* for when lte is not
available.

with lte, there *is* a sim and it covers gsm/cdma.

stop talking about stuff you know nothing about, especially about cdma,
about which you have a stick up your ass.

> > everything must be activated. you don't just get a phone and expect it
> > to work out of the box.
>
> Yes for GSM. The phone need not be activated, you just insert an
> existing SIM card in it. And when you travel you can insert another
> network's SIM card in your phone. (provided it is not locked).

same for lte (other than sprint which uses uicc cards that are tied to
the phone).

[nospam]

In article <nr9cc0$7kh$1...@gioia.aioe.org>, Horace Algier

much worse.

[Jolly Roger]

Chris <ithi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Has there been any mention of what they actually *sound* like? I find the
> current Apple ear phones atrocious and have only ever used them once. Much
> prefer my sennheiser ear buds.
>
> The features in the earpods are really impressive, but if they sound
> terrible they're just a waste of space.

AirPods hands-on: They stayed in my ears and sounded awesome

"I really thought I'd hate the AirPods, but guess what? They rock!"

"The AirPods stayed put, and they stayed loud. The music (more Sia,
naturally) sounded full and lush and I couldn’t hear a single word anyone
around me was saying, as if I was completely sealed off in a bubble of rock
and roll. Pretty impressive."

<http://www.macworld.com/article/3117706/headphones/airpods-hands-on-they-stayed-in-my-ears-and-sounded-awesome.html>

--
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

[Jolly Roger]

Horace Algier <hor...@horatio.net> wrote:

> On Mon, 12 Sep 2016 07:23:01 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote:
>
>> Has there been any mention of what they actually *sound* like?
>

> Who cares about sound?
> It's *style* that matters!
>
> :)

You're such a talented troll! Make mommy proud!

[Jolly Roger]

Horace Algier <hor...@horatio.net> wrote:

> On Sun, 11 Sep 2016 22:24:09 -0400, nospam wrote:
>
>>> Verizon and Sprint made the mistakes of not upgrading their CDMA to 3G
>>> HSPA/UMTS and are now stuck with paying extra to support both CDMA and
>>> GSM/LTE.
>>
>> nonsense.
>

> I think I agree with you

You think wrong.

[Rod Speed]

"Horace Algier" <hor...@horatio.net> wrote in message
news:nr9872$1tso$7...@gioia.aioe.org...

> On Sun, 11 Sep 2016 22:00:02 -0400, JF Mezei wrote:
>
>> CDMA protocol doesn't use SIM cards. The phone must be programmed at its
>> end, and the network programmed at its end to accept the phone.
>
> Ah. CDMA activation!
>

> I have had T-Mobile "activate" a *new* SIM card when we switched a kid's
> Nexus 5 (micro SIM) to the iPhone 6 (nano SIM); but I never had to
> "activate" an existing switch of the same-size SIM from one phone to
> another.
>

> But Verizon "is" different!

>
> So thanks for reminding me that CDMA *must* be activated.
>

> That means my current strategy of getting a free Verizon iPhone 7 requires
> "activation" on the Verizon network.
>
> Luckily, that seems to be easy.
> I think this is legal.
>
> Bearing in mind that any fool can pay to get something, and that it takes
> intelligence (and risk) to get it legally for free, do you see this as
> legal and viable?
>
> 1. Friend in no-tax state trades in "my" iPhone 6 for a Verizon iPhone 7
> 2. Friend activates it on Verizon & unlocks it after 40 days
> 3. Friend sends new iPhone 7 to me
>
> Is that viable?
> Is that legal?

Corse its legal. You can do anything you like with a phone you own.

[ElfinArc]

JF Mezei <jfmezei...@vaxination.ca> wrote:
> On 2016-09-13 13:00, nospam wrote:
>
>>> But Verizon "is" different!
>>
>> no they're not.
>
> With GSM, wireless service is tied to the SIM card. You can move your
> SIM card from phone to phone and your subscription follows you. The SIM
> card also contains the encryption keys for the communication. (and prior
> to smartphones, the SIM card also contained all of your personal info
> such as name, phone number, contacts, SMS messages sent/received, so
> moving from one phone to the next was totally transparent).
>
> With the CDMA service, there is no SIM card, so the subscription
> information has to be programmed into the phone and is tied to that phone.
>

But most phones/tablets that do CDMA still have SIM cards. And just like
straight GSM, once activated can be moved to a different device.

>
>
>> everything must be activated. you don't just get a phone and expect it
>> to work out of the box.
>
> Yes for GSM. The phone need not be activated, you just insert an
> existing SIM card in it. And when you travel you can insert another
> network's SIM card in your phone. (provided it is not locked).
>
>
>
>

--
Elfin

[ElfinArc]

No homework required, you've already been told what your 'gaming' is gonna
do. I know, it is a waste of time to try to educate the terminally stupid,
but I keep trying.

--
Elfin

[MalcolmO]

My carrier doesn't deal in iPhones. :/ That said, I bought outright a
'lightly loved' 5c from them that was indistinguishable from new. 16GB
not 8. That said, my monthly charge is less than half what other iPhone
users are paying. So no complaints but one day I may wish I was using a
newer phone. At that time, I'll probably just buy it at the Apple Store.
Or maybe my carrier will have 'lightly loved' ones at that time.
--
Malcolm

[Rod Speed]

Horace Algier <hor...@horatio.net> wrote

> ElfinArc wrote

>>> T-Mobile requires the phone to be on
>>> their network for only 1.5 billing cycles.

>>> That is 40 days.

>>> After that, they don't care.
>>> They will unlock the phone at that point.

>>> Of course, the billing credits last for 2 years on
>>> the original bill. So, you need a friend willing
>>> to do that for you (which I have, for Verizon).

>> Bullshit! T-Mobile, like the other carriers with
>> their trade-in/up, zero interest payment plans
>> won't release the phone until it is fully paid for.

> You're just guessing.

Nope. No carrier is actually going to be stupid enough to
give you a free iphone 7 without ensuring that arseholes like
you wont just piss off to another carrier as soon as they can.

> Anyone can guess.
> Ask nospam - he's an expert at "just guessing".

> I'm only telling you exactly what T-mobile told me.

You clearly either didn’t ask the right question or they
are deliberately shafting you and are about to fuck you
over big time and piss themselves laughing about that.

> If you don't believe it, you can call T-Mobile yourself.
> So can anyone else.

And they can ask the right questions and realise that
no carrier is actually stupid enough to so what you
are stupid enough to believe T-Mobile will do.

> If I'm wrong, *someone* will call T-Mobile and ask them
> and they can report back here that I'm wrong. In fact, lots
> of someone's will do that, since the deal I uncovered (using
> intelligence & effort) sure does seem too good to be true.

So it is in fact too good to be true.

> But I find these types of deals all the time.

More of your lies. You haven't in fact ever found one like that before.

> That's because I am intelligent. And I use forethought.

> BTW, I'm perfectly fine with being wrong but I heard it from
> T-mobile themselves so, as far as I know, I'm not wrong.

You are anyway. No carrier would actually be that stupid.

> I told you where I got my facts.
> Where did *you* get your facts?

Just common sense, which admittedly isnt actually that common.

> Did *you* hear it from T-mobile?
> Or are you just guessing (as always)?

Nope, (s)he is putting his/her brain into gear, unlike you.

> Or, maybe you're upset because you paid for something you could
> have gotten for free had you used a modicum of forethought?

Why would anyone be upset about being able to
do what you are doing if it was actually possible ?

[Rod Speed]

Horace Algier <hor...@horatio.net> wrote

> ElfinArc wrote

>> So then your choice is:
>> 1. Get the Verizon phone and stay with Verizon
>> for the 2 years and get the $650 deal
>> 2. Get the Verizon phone and pay the full price
>> up front in cash and use it wherever you want to.

> Or, if it will work,

Corse it wont.

> I do some homework and use a modicum of intelligence
> to get that Verizon iPhone 7 for the cost of repairing a
> cracked screen on the Verizon iPhone 6...

What will actually happen is that that kid gets shafted, you watch.

Still worth getting the 7 from T-Mobile if 32GB is enough
tho, if only because of the known design fault with the 6.

Tho if it was me, I'd just wait until apple gets off their arse
and replaces the 6 for free when the design fault manifests
on that particular phone, because 32GB is a bit low for me.
I found the 16GB 5 was a pain in the arse, but that is obviously
something that varys considerably by person with how they
use the phone. I have podcasts download automatically
because I listen to them when walking for exercise and
when having to pass the time at say an auction etc and
when driving, and that was what filled my 16GB. Video
was also a massive problem, and iOS updates etc too.

That's why I went for 128GB with the 6S, to eliminate that hassle.