For you, will the iPhone ever be enough to take the place of your blackberry so you don’t need to carry around two devices?

Surprisingly as well, downloading a web page on EDGE hasn’t been that slow for me. In fact, when comparing it with EVDO downloads on VZW, I have to say that in most cases I haven’t noticed much of a difference. Perhaps that’s because there is greater latency on EVDO, meaning that even though the page loads faster once it begins to load, that there is a bigger time lag in the beginning for the page to actually start to load. Also, perhaps the Safari browser on ATT processes pages more efficiently than the BB browser.

My sister also has a BB on ATT and she thinks its great. I tried it out and again, I found it to work well at least in a few areas where I tested it.

So I must say that for now ATT has won newfound respect from me.

The manufactures of the iPhone, next generation RIM BB’s and Symbian phones also understand and steer clear of cdma and qualcomm. There are no “cool” phones that verizon grants it’s customers to purchase. verizons phones are sadly lacking to past and current GSM handsets and smartphones. GSM’s positives, consumer freedom, coverage equal to if not better than cdma and top of the line non-crippled devices make the global standard a no brainer.

When AT&Ts coverage and call clarity match that of VZW I will switch. AT&T gets all the cool phones (and VZW gets all the cool phones about a year or two later). I am an early adopter… I’d much rather be on AT&T. I don’t like crippled phones and and old products, but I need call clarity and coverage first and foremost.

Lastly: this may be an Apple thread… but it is on a blackberry web site… and this site constantly sings the praises of VZW.

i was with cingular/att&t for 14yrs. my job requires a lot driving and i encountered many many no service areas.

i left cingular 18 mths ago because my phone service went from unreliable to no service at my home and i live in a relatively large subdivision.

verizon limits my bluetooth phone by disabling many features, but i have not encountered a single no coverage area.

i will buy an iPod touch and wait for att& to upgrade their network purchasing the iPhone.

Not so sure I agree with Apple becoming a wireless service provider or a mvno without partnering with another technology manufacture or net service provider which also wants to provide it’s customers without dealing with 3rd parties. In a prefect world Apple wouldn’t have to deal with service providers:

“Apple CEO Steve Jobs said he was wary of producing an Apple cellphone because, instead of selling it directly to the public, he would have to offer it through what he called the “four orifices” — the four big U.S. cellphone carriers.”

But right now it’s saddly part of the game for Apple and it’s customers. Apple’s deal with at&t HAS changed the industry for the better. Apple makes the phone and at&t provides the service, at&t doesn’t tell Apple what the phone can or can’t do.

I would like to see Apple with loads of wireless spectrum to provide in house for it’s customers, but sure don’t want to see Apple getting bogged down in providing and maintaining a wireless network. Let the “four orifices” do the dirty work, Apple can provide the consumers the devices, AND Apple can call the shots when dealing with the “four orifices”. The iPhone is truly revolutionary.

Roughly a million customers call BS on your statements about the iPhone.

Plus, there’s the fact that ATT has a 5 yr exclusive on the iPhone; Apple would have to wait years before releasing their own device.

No doubt that Apple would come up with some innovative ideas as a wireless provider, but I just don’t see it happening. It’s too far out on a limb.