• Our podcast feed
• Download Directly
• Subscribe via iTunes

Join Rene, Chad, and Michael Manna of the T4 Show for AT&T and Apple ads strike back, Schiller speaks, the WebApps alternative, Jailbreak worms, Chrome OS, and all the week's news! Listen in!

Credits

Thanks to the the iPhone Blog Store for sponsoring the podcast, and to everyone who showed up for the live chat!

Our music comes from the following sources:

• I Called You -- iPhone Remix by Pete Leidy
via Sneakmove iPhone Ringtone Challenge

• Our podcast feed
• Download Directly
• Subscribe via iTunes

Join Rene, Chad, and Precentral.net's Keith Newman for Apple gaming, profit share, OnLive, private API, Facebook fallout, Verizon attack ads and AT&T strikes back, gPhone cometh, Palm Pixi, and all the news, plus your questions answered! Listen in!

Credits

Thanks to the the iPhone Blog Store for sponsoring the podcast, and to everyone who showed up for the live chat!

Our music comes from the following sources:

• I Called You -- iPhone Remix by Pete Leidy
via Sneakmove iPhone Ringtone Challenge

By now most of you have seen the infamous Verizon "map for that" attack ads against AT&T. It was only a matter of time before we heard Verizon's response to the lawsuit [Full document PDF link] that AT&T recently slapped them with and respond they did. Verizon's lawyers put their heads together to come up with the following opening line:

AT&T did not file this lawsuit because Verizon’s “There’s A Map For That” advertisements are untrue; AT&T sued because Verizon’s ads are true and the truth hurts.

Ouch, if you continue reading the lengthy document you will find that Verizon does not intend to remove the ads from the air unless it is forced to. They also claim AT&T agrees the map coverage is indeed accurate and before anything progresses both parties need to do some more of their own investigating into the matter.

All of this really isn't necessary, both parties should agree to carry along and spend their time doing something more productive - improving both of their respective networks.

[Via Engadget Mobile]

Verizon has unleashed yet another Droid-centric, anti-iPhone attack ad (YAAiPAA), a page in Sports Illustrated, that's closer to the first tragic iDon't commercial rather than the later, more clever "map for that" ones. And what's more, CNET thinks they're getting more personal, expressing feelings about their (ongoing) negotiations with Apple to bring the iPhone to Verizon, and perhaps even attacking Steve Jobs himself for his role in those negotiations. Here's the text:

This is a world of "nope," "nuh-uh," and "sorry, Charlie."

A world of smiling denial. Petty tyrannies that have made their way into our cell phones. Into the very way we choose to speak to another human being. There are dozens of doesn'ts. Doesn't allow customization. Doesn't run multiple apps. Doesn't allow you to swap out batteries. doesn't allow open development. These arrogant little devices are barely worth more than the pocket link they rest upon. Because now there's a phone so smart, so strong. So subservient to its user, it refuses to include "doesn't" in its dictionary app.

In a world of doesn't. Droid Does.

Also specifically targeted again are the commonly-voiced frustrations of certain power iPhone users, and those philosophically opposed to Apple's iPhone model, with whom the above is certain to resonate. Who knows, maybe it will even push Apple to address some of those issues in a future product revision. Ultimately, that's as good for consumers as Verizon ditching (mostly -- yikes!) their own incredibly controlling, consumer-hostile practices in order to be able to make these claims in the first place. (Call us cynical, however, for not believing Verizon has had any huge philosophical turn-around beyond cold, profit-centric, anti-iPhone competitive positioning, though we'd love to be proven wrong).

But back to this specific ad. Is it effective, and is it personal? Did they just take it to the iPhone, Apple, and Steve? (And are they trying to make his brain explode with that typography and punctuation alone?)

[Thanks Icebike for the tip!]

Ho-ho-hold on a minute, Verizon -- AT&T's not finding much to laugh about in those new anti-AT&T iPhone "map for that" commercials that show a teensy, tiny blue GSM/HSPA 3G footprint compared the ginormous country painted CDMA/EVDO red. In fact, AT&T is amending their original lawsuit to include those new misfit toys, Santa's workshop, and blue Christmas ads.

“Contrary to the image presented in the Verizon ads, our wireless network is pervasive,” said an AT&T spokesman. “It covers over 300 million people, or 97 percent of the U.S. population. Our fastest, or 3G, network covers approximately 233 million people, or 75 percent of the U.S. population….[Verizon's] use of white space is misleading.”

In other words, AT&T is saying Verizon's 3G coverage of mountains and lakes is impressive for the fish and eagles, but they think they have the humans and their "cities" covered just fine, thanks. (Though, again, NYC and SF might disagree...)

Digital Daily has the whole, amended, complaint for your reading pleasure. Let us know your take.

We have to admit, Verizon's latest, Xmas-themed iPhone and AT&T attack ads bring the funny. Continuing the savvy "map for that" (rather than silly DroidDoes), the first shows the land of misfit toys where an iPhone-looking device is condemned for its poor AT&T 3G coverage.

After the break, we have elves giving Verizon devices, with robust 3G coverage, to nice children and an iPhone with poor AT&T coverage to the naughty. And, lastly, a father has a blue Xmas when his iPhone can't reach his family (though a Verizon present awaits him when he finally gets home).

Attacking the iPhone on it's major front-facing weakness, much-hyped consumer dissatisfaction with AT&T's network is the kind of smart that is -- and, given Verizon's recent comments, may even be an attempt to show Apple the iPhone would be better off on a better network?

Of course, AT&T likely isn't laughing at Verizon's claims of 5x 3G coverage, given they've already filed a lawsuit...

[via Engadget]

UPDATE: TiPb asked a few non-geek friends and most of them didn't even realize Verizon was targeting the iPhone in these ads (some thought the commercial was saying whatever device they were talking about didn't do the things listed). Is that an ad-failure, or was it deliberately targeting geeks?

Secondly, Sacha Seagan over at Gearlog brings up the now apparently dual, and now opposite meaning behind "open application" buzzwords - a device totally controlled by Verizon.

Thirdly, does the push for the Droid explain why Verizon seemingly buried the BlackBerry Storm2 announcement?

Original post after the break!

Verizon has now aired their first new Android 2.0-centric, anti-iPhone (technically "iDon't iDevice") attack ad and placed a new website online to go with them. Surprise, surprise -- like that leaked BlackBerry Storm2 vs. iPhone 3G(!) chart Verizon put together, the ads contain blatant inaccuracies (even if typeset in Apple's typical Myriad Pro):

• iDon't have a real keyboard: Er, it does. Not to get all Spock, but nothing unreal exists, the iPhone's keyboard exists, therefore it's real. Sure, it's soft/virtual (like the Verizon BlackBerry Storm2's) rather than hard, but it's certainly not imaginary.
• iDon't run simultaneous apps: Again, it does. The iPhone can run iPod, Email, Phone, Messages, App Store/iTunes downloads, Quicktime streams, and other functions in the background with full multitasking. Apple restricts two or more 3rd party apps from running at the same time, but that's obviously too subtle a difference for Verizon. (iPhone on HSPA can also multitask voice and data. Droid on CDMA -- no data when you're on the phone.)
• iDon't take night shots: Well, we guess they mean the camera's ISO doesn't produce good results in low light. Fair point. Arguably nothing short of a really good DSLR sensor does, tiny LED flash included. Though 5 megapixels is still nice.
• iDon't allow open development. Really, Verizon, with your history, you want to play that card? Android is an about face for you, not a two-face. We'll wait and see on this one.
• iDon't customize. Okay, fair point. One out of how many so far? UPDATE: Shawn Roberts points out it remains to be seen how customizable the Droid is. If it's just re-arranging icons, the iPhone can do that too.
• iDon't run widgets. What's a widget? Arguably iPhone Stocks and Weather are widgets not far removed from Mac OS X's Dashboard counter-parts. We're guessing they mean little, persistent on-screen information snippets. We'll give them a second point for that.
• iDon't have a removable battery. Third point. Apple's driven away from that entire concept towards longer life, built-in batteries and external charging packs. If that's something you can't stand, fair enough.

Wrap all that up in an Adobe Flash-only site for Verizon's upcoming Android powered Droid phone, and we're thinking Verizon better hope that the handset ends up a lot better than the marketing thus far. And, that's the key point here, as Daring Fireball points out:

“Droid” is going to be a Verizon-owned brand. It’s purportedly a Motorola-manufactured phone, but Verizon is the licensee of the “Droid” trademark. (Which name, by the way, strikes me as the perfect name for an Android OS phone — sort of implicitly establishes it as the Android phone.) That’s the big thing. Verizon doesn’t see itself as a mere carrier for other companies’ phones. It sees itself as being bigger than the phones. It’s Verizon-vs.-Apple in this spot, not Verizon-vs.-AT&T.

It's exactly the opposite approach, with Apple leading the carriers with iPhone (hopefully hastening them into their "dumb-pipe" future), now Verizon wants to turn back the clock by owning an OS like Android. They want to put carriers at the front again. Is that something that tempts you to switch?

[Video via Engadget]