I understand where you are coming from.. I would like mms aswell.. although I'll probably use it twice, and then forget about it.. but I don't know the size of all those companies, maybe att is a much larger scale, it certainly seems so by the sales figure.. and obviously they made a mistake by the way they did coding previously, which is creating this problem.. I'm not going to act like they don't have to assume some fault.. but to get the whole fault, is quite different. Apple created a phone that was supposed to be ahead of the market.. but something as simple as mms took them two years.. I can't complain about it taking att two additional months to get it set up.

The first iphone came out in 2007, 3.0 came out in 2009.. it took apple two years to release mms, it will take att 2 months. Also, different departments work on different things.. not every single att resource is working on getting mms fixed.. they have a business to run also. So just because one group found a problem and tried to deter it, doesn't mean the other group isn't still hard at work getting mms to us.

The title is somewhat misleading - as at least Joe McG's post shows.

Presumably Rene means they have to absorb the subsidy costs and pay for the phones before they recoup the profits from the contract. They isn't really what 'had to pay upfront' means in business. That phrase is used to indicate a company has to pay for product first in order to take delivery. That isn't what happened here.

I think MMS on AT&T is a myth, like Bigfoot, or the Yetti.