no intention of:
fighting 2 18 year old females-just wanting to educate them about alternative phones & cost savings.
Just giving them what they want. Sure they can buy these phones themselves buy I am certainly not paying dime 1 toward them. IMO this is still a major luxury item for most people.
Letting them do and or get whatever they want. So long as I am footing the bill for school, housing, food & board there are certain expectations I consider to be non-negotiable. If they want to move out and and become clerks at the dollar store so be it. Then I will have no say in their lives.
Wait for USCC to get Iphones. I cannot ever see this happening. Too small a company I do believe.
I think my question about the two phones is unanswerable. I suspect the whole argument/debate is about personal preference which I can respect. If it works for you and you are happy with either phone OS then it's good for you and doesn't effect me.
I appreciate the knowledge I've gained here and I now have a better understanding of those with both platforms.
I say if they want iPhones, want to sign up for ATT (or whoever), pay for them themselves, let them. They'll be back......
If no one's brought it up, Virgin's got the 16GB iPhone 4s for full price ($650) but then service is $30/40/50 for 300/1200/unlimited minutes, so it's cheaper then USCC.
As for why an iPhone-depends. iOS supports dealing with/syncing podcasts from a PC far better than any other mobile OS. Right now only iOS has TomTom software (although supposedly an Android version is coming soon). Also only iOS and Google's Nexus devices (which USCC doesn't offer) get OS updates in a timely fashion...or in some cases at all, keeping you safer online.
Also USCC probably wanted to wait and see how the iPhone does on other regional/local carriers before they risk a ton of money on it. It costs carriers a lot to offer the iPhone.
That "outdated technology" is in fact what the vast majority of people actually use to connect to a cell phone network.putting down such a big investment on a phone with outdated network technology
"Better spent"? Why does it cost them anything? I'd say maybe they need some minimum commitment, but smaller companies than USCC have it already. And if it costs more, charge more for it. There's no money that would have been spent on an iPhone instead of network upgrades. I'd assume the iPhone 6 will have LTE support though, but IT really doesn't need it either.The money was better spent building out the LTE network.
Hmm...wonder if there's any chance that 5 years from now you'd be able to buy an unlocked Nexus 90 or whatever and use it with USCC...
http://www.digitaltrends.com/mobile/...ying-carriers/ And as for 3G being outdated, ask someone who lives in an LTE coverage area and see what they say.
And that's IF Apple even lets carriers adjust the price. That may be barred by whatever agreement Apple makes the carrier agree to in order to carry the iPhone.
Also, Apple requires carriers to purchase a set amount of phones outright. It can be a huge investment. I suspect that would have cut into the funds needed to implement the LTE network.