<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Gizmodo Australia &#187; Networks</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.gizmodo.com.au/tags/networks/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.gizmodo.com.au</link>
	<description>the Gadget Guide &#124; Technology and consumer electronics news and reviews</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 22 Nov 2009 06:39:42 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>If The Xperia X10 Partners Up, It&#8217;ll Be With AT&amp;T</title>
		<link>http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2009/11/if-the-xperia-x10-partners-up-itll-be-with-att/</link>
		<comments>http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2009/11/if-the-xperia-x10-partners-up-itll-be-with-att/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 21 Nov 2009 23:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Chris Jacob</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Phones]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[android]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[at&t]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ericsson]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[mobile phones]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Networks]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[sony]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[sony ericsson]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[sony ericsson xperia 10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[x10]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[xperia]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[xperia x10]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.gizmodo.com.au/?p=368594</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Anyone hoping to see the Sony Ericsson X10 on T-Mobile, look away now or you&#8217;ll be sorely disappointed. Phandroid noticed that the American version of the X10 won&#8217;t support the necessary frequencies to connect to T-Mobile&#8217;s network.
Yup, even though the specs page lists support for UMTS/HSPA 800/850/900/1700/1900/2100, Sony Ericsson is going to be localising the [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a rel="lytebox" href="http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/gizmodo/2009/11/img_1942.jpg"><img src="http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/4/2009/11/500x_img_1942.jpg" alt="" class="center" /></a>Anyone hoping to see the Sony Ericsson X10 on T-Mobile, look away now or you&#8217;ll be sorely disappointed. Phandroid noticed that the American version of the X10 won&#8217;t support the necessary frequencies to connect to T-Mobile&#8217;s network.<span id="more-368594"></span></p>
<p>Yup, even though the specs page lists support for UMTS/HSPA 800/850/900/1700/1900/2100, Sony Ericsson is going to be localising the radios. From the source:</p>
<blockquote><p> UMTS HSPA 800/850/1900 only available for phones sold in Americas (except Brazil) and Australia. UMTS HSPA 900/1700 not available for phones sold in Americas. UMTS HSPA 1900/2100 available worldwide.</p>
</blockquote>
<p> So that means you&#8217;ll still be able to find an X10 that works on T-Mobile, just not in this country. You&#8217;ll still be able to import if you want to use your expensive handset with T-Mo&#8217;s cheap Even More Plus plans. But if you want to have that huge <a href="http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2009/11/sony-ericsson-xperia-x10-to-cost-us880-what-the/">$US880 cost</a> subsidised at all, looks like you&#8217;ll be going with AT&#038;T. [<a href="http://phandroid.com/2009/11/21/xperia-x10-to-att-details-emerge/">Phandroid</a> via <a href="http://www.engadget.com/2009/11/21/sony-ericsson-xperia-x10-heading-to-atandt/">Engadget</a>]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2009/11/if-the-xperia-x10-partners-up-itll-be-with-att/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>AT&amp;T Goes On The Offensive With New &#8220;Side By Side&#8221; Commercial</title>
		<link>http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2009/11/att-goes-on-the-offensive-with-new-side-by-side-commercial/</link>
		<comments>http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2009/11/att-goes-on-the-offensive-with-new-side-by-side-commercial/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Nov 2009 04:45:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Rosa Golijan</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Networks]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ads]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[advertising]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[at&t]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[clips]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[verizon]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.gizmodo.com.au/?p=368077</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[
Just as AT&#038;T&#8217;s injunction for the Verizon &#8220;There&#8217;s a map for that&#8221; ads to be taken off-air was denied, the company&#8217;s own pugnacious messages started playing. I somehow doubt that these &#8220;Side by Side&#8221; commercials are gonna make Verizon cry.
]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><object width="570" height="360" class="left gawkerVideo embeddedVideo videoObject_0"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/X3PbBmElObI&#038;hl=en&#038;fs=1&#038;fmt=22"><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/X3PbBmElObI&#038;hl=en&#038;fs=1&#038;fmt=22" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="570" height="360" class="left gawkerVideo"></object></p>
<p>Just as <a href="http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2009/11/judge-tells-att-to-stop-whining-as-the-verizon-ads-will-stay/">AT&#038;T&#8217;s injunction for the Verizon &#8220;There&#8217;s a map for that&#8221; ads to be taken off-air was denied</a>, the company&#8217;s own pugnacious messages started playing. I somehow doubt that these &#8220;Side by Side&#8221; commercials are gonna make Verizon cry.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2009/11/att-goes-on-the-offensive-with-new-side-by-side-commercial/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Judge Tells AT&amp;T To Stop Whining As The Verizon Ads Will Stay</title>
		<link>http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2009/11/judge-tells-att-to-stop-whining-as-the-verizon-ads-will-stay/</link>
		<comments>http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2009/11/judge-tells-att-to-stop-whining-as-the-verizon-ads-will-stay/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 18 Nov 2009 23:46:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Rosa Golijan</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Networks]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[3g]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ads]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[advertising]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[at&t]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[lawsuits]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[verizon]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.gizmodo.com.au/?p=367984</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Looks like we&#8217;ll keep seeing Verizon&#8217;s &#8220;There&#8217;s a map for that&#8221; commercials as AT&#038;T&#8217;s injunction to have them taken off the air was denied. Granted, the judge had a weak moment of kindness and left room for a follow-up hearing.
US District Court Judge Timothy Batten Sr remarked that people might &#8220;misunderstand&#8221; the commercials, &#8220;but that [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><img src="http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/4/2009/11/500x_mappp.jpg" alt="" class="center" />Looks like we&#8217;ll keep seeing Verizon&#8217;s <a href="http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2009/10/verizon-bitch-slaps-att-in-theres-a-map-for-that-commercial/">&#8220;There&#8217;s a map for that&#8221; commercials</a> as AT&#038;T&#8217;s injunction to have them taken off the air was denied. Granted, the judge had a weak moment of kindness and left room for a follow-up hearing.<span id="more-367984"></span></p>
<p>US District Court Judge Timothy Batten Sr remarked that people might &#8220;misunderstand&#8221; the commercials, &#8220;but that doesn&#8217;t mean they&#8217;re misleading&#8221;. He continued to add that &#8220;most people who are watching TV are semi-catatonic&#8221; to begin with. Let&#8217;s hope his train of thought remains during the follow-up hearing on December 16, because the case is starting to lose any <a href="http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2009/11/verizon-to-att-the-truth-hurts-bitch/">entertainment value</a>. [<a href="http://www.ajc.com/business/judge-rejects-at-t-203765.html">AJC</a> via <a href="http://www.engadget.com/2009/11/18/atandt-loses-request-for-injunction-against-verizons-map-for-that/">Engadget</a>]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2009/11/judge-tells-att-to-stop-whining-as-the-verizon-ads-will-stay/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>AT&amp;T&#8217;s Tech Support People Are As Happy As Their Customers</title>
		<link>http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2009/11/atts-tech-support-people-are-as-happy-as-their-customers/</link>
		<comments>http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2009/11/atts-tech-support-people-are-as-happy-as-their-customers/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 18 Nov 2009 17:25:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>John Herrman</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Networks]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[at&t]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[customer service]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[technical support]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.gizmodo.com.au/?p=367808</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[It&#8217;s just plausible enough to be real, and just real enough to be crushingly depressing. 
[Digg via Consumerist]
]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a rel="lytebox" href="http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/gizmodo/2009/11/darlene.jpg"><img src="http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/4/2009/11/500x_darlene.jpg" alt="" class="center" /></a>It&#8217;s just plausible enough to be real, and just real enough to be crushingly depressing. <span id="more-367808"></span></p>
<p>[<a href="http://digg.com/comedy/I_think_I_got_through_to_one_of_the_AT_T_support_chat_people">Digg</a> via <a href="http://consumerist.com/5407532/att-rep-wants-to-die">Consumerist</a>]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2009/11/atts-tech-support-people-are-as-happy-as-their-customers/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Virgin Mobile Launches Rollover Post-Paid Phone Plans</title>
		<link>http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2009/11/virgin-mobile-launches-rollover-post-paid-phone-plans/</link>
		<comments>http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2009/11/virgin-mobile-launches-rollover-post-paid-phone-plans/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 18 Nov 2009 02:15:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Nick Broughall</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Networks]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[au]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[phone plans]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[postpaid]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[rollover]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[virgin]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[virgin mobile]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.gizmodo.com.au/?p=367674</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[At the end of each month, do you know what happens to all those unused minutes of talk and text in your phone contract. They DIE! Dead! Gone forever into the ether, with nothing to remember them by. Unless you&#8217;re on one of Virgin&#8217;s new rollover plans, which rolls over any unused talk and text [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://media.gizmodo.com.au/wp//2009/11/rollover_cap_example.jpg"><img src="http://media.gizmodo.com.au/wp//2009/11/rollover_cap_example.jpg" alt="rollover_cap_example" title="rollover_cap_example" width="514" height="195" class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-367685" /></a>At the end of each month, do you know what happens to all those unused minutes of talk and text in your phone contract. They DIE! Dead! Gone forever into the ether, with nothing to remember them by. Unless you&#8217;re on one of Virgin&#8217;s new rollover plans, which rolls over any unused talk and text to the following month. Then you get an extra 30 days to say a proper goodbye&#8230;<span id="more-367674"></span></p>
<p>The post-paid plans only rollover for the month after they are due to expire, so you can&#8217;t stockpile a heap of minutes and then spend a week on the phone to your Nanna in Brazil. The rolled over minutes are also only used if you happen to exceed that months quota, meaning that you should hopefully always have enough time for talking and texting.</p>
<p><del datetime="2009-11-18T04:11:17+00:00">There are rollover options for data as well</del>The plans don&#8217;t actually let you roll over your data allowance, although they do include international calls and texting. And if you&#8217;re an iPhone user, there are a couple of dedicated rollover plans for you.</p>
<p>Check out Virgin&#8217;s site for a complete run down on the different plans.</p>
<p>[<a href="http://www.virginmobile.com.au/rollover">Virgin Rollover Cap plans</a>]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2009/11/virgin-mobile-launches-rollover-post-paid-phone-plans/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>BlackBerry Internet Service&#8217;s Data Is Down Across The Globe</title>
		<link>http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2009/11/blackberry-internet-services-data-is-down-across-the-globe/</link>
		<comments>http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2009/11/blackberry-internet-services-data-is-down-across-the-globe/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Nov 2009 04:20:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Dan Nosowitz</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Phones]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bis]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[blackberry]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[blackberry internet service]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[data]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[mobile phones]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Networks]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[outages]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[rim]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.gizmodo.com.au/?p=367453</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[There are reports that BlackBerry Internet Service, which is sort of a portal monitored by RIM (so it&#8217;s not carrier-specific) through which BlackBerry data runs, is down worldwide. That could affect email, BlackBerry Messenger, web browsing and maps, to start.
According to comments on various message boards, BlackBerry data is either out or patchy at least [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><img src="http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/gizmodo/2009/11/bbstorm2_01.jpg" alt="" class="left" />There are reports that BlackBerry Internet Service, which is sort of a portal monitored by RIM (so it&#8217;s not carrier-specific) through which BlackBerry data runs, is down worldwide. That could affect email, BlackBerry Messenger, web browsing and maps, to start.<span id="more-367453"></span></p>
<p>According to comments on various message boards, BlackBerry data is either out or patchy at least in the States and Canada, with users unable to access BlackBerry services — but not necessarily third-party software like Opera Mini or Google Maps, although some, like Facebook, use BIS and are thus having problems. It&#8217;s not carrier-specific, with problems being reported on Verizon, T-Mobile, Telus and Rogers, but it&#8217;s also not universally down like the Great Sidekick Outage of 2009 — some users are reporting no problems at all, while others are completely unable to access data. We&#8217;ll keep you updated, but in turn, why don&#8217;t you keep us updated: Any BlackBerry users out there having data problems?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2009/11/blackberry-internet-services-data-is-down-across-the-globe/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Verizon To AT&amp;T: &#8220;The Truth Hurts (Bitch!)&#8221;</title>
		<link>http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2009/11/verizon-to-att-the-truth-hurts-bitch/</link>
		<comments>http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2009/11/verizon-to-att-the-truth-hurts-bitch/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Nov 2009 03:40:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Dan Nosowitz</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Networks]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ads]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[advertising]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[at&t]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[lawsuits]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[verizon]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.gizmodo.com.au/?p=367452</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[OK, so I may have added &#8220;bitch&#8221; for emphasis &#8212; but this AT&#038;T vs. Verizon lawsuit over the &#8220;Map for That&#8221; ads is turning into an all-out PR smackdown. This stuff isn&#8217;t even written in proper legal language anymore.
When your lawsuits sound like press releases, it&#8217;s because they probably are (not that we care, the [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a rel="lytebox" href="http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/gizmodo/2009/11/true.jpg"><img src="http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/4/2009/11/500x_true.jpg" alt="" class="center" /></a>OK, so I may have added &#8220;bitch&#8221; for emphasis &mdash; but this AT&#038;T vs. Verizon lawsuit over the &#8220;Map for That&#8221; ads is turning into an all-out PR smackdown. This stuff isn&#8217;t even written in proper legal language anymore.<span id="more-367452"></span></p>
<p>When your lawsuits sound like press releases, it&#8217;s because they probably are (not that we care, the whole case is pretty entertaining). Check out this opening statement from Verizon:</p>
<blockquote><p> AT&#038;T did not file this lawsuit because Verizon&#8217;s &#8220;There&#8217;s A Map For That&#8221; advertisements are untrue; AT&#038;T sued because Verizon&#8217;s ads are true and the truth hurts.</p>
</blockquote>
<p> YA BURNT, AT&#038;T! Verizon goes on to accuse AT&#038;T of failing to adequately expand its 3G coverage to match demand for its smartphones, which is sort of a hard point for AT&#038;T to argue. Verizon claims that its advertisements are &#8220;literally true&#8221; (instead of philosophically true? Metaphorically true? True in the sense in which it is used in animal husbandry, as in purebred? What?) and not misleading, and that AT&#038;T has failed to provide customers with an accurate map of its coverage. It&#8217;s pretty great, really &mdash; if you&#8217;ve ever wished the American legal system was more like it is on <em>Law and Order</em>, this whole statement is a gift. [<a href="http://www.engadget.com/2009/11/16/verizon-responds-to-atandts-map-for-that-lawsuit-the-truth-hurt/">Engadget</a>]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2009/11/verizon-to-att-the-truth-hurts-bitch/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Why US Wireless Pricing Sucks</title>
		<link>http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2009/11/why-u-s-wireless-pricing-sucks/</link>
		<comments>http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2009/11/why-u-s-wireless-pricing-sucks/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 15 Nov 2009 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Chris Jacob</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Networks]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[at&t]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[mobile phones]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Phones]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[sprint]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[t-mobile]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[verizon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[wireless]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.gizmodo.com.au/?p=367041</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The New York Times ran a story today that helps explain why the American cellular industry is so screwy. In short: it&#8217;s our fault.
There are two main problems: We like bills to be consistent, and we&#8217;re risk-averse consumers.
To the first point, Sprint tried to offer a plan in 2004 where 300 minutes cost $US35, and [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><img src="http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/gizmodo/2009/11/wireless_industry_small.jpg" alt="" class="left" /><em>The New York Times</em> ran a story today that helps explain why the American cellular industry is so screwy. In short: it&#8217;s our fault.<span id="more-367041"></span></p>
<p>There are two main problems: We like bills to be consistent, and we&#8217;re risk-averse consumers.</p>
<p>To the first point, Sprint tried to offer a plan in 2004 where 300 minutes cost $US35, and $US2.50 for each additional 50 minutes. Seems great to me, no outrageous overage charges. But customers didn&#8217;t like it because their bills would vary so much from month-to-month, so Sprint switched back to age-old tiered minutes plans.</p>
<p>Because we like consistent billing, the carriers institute ridiculous overage charges to convince us to spend up. That way we don&#8217;t have to worry about any unforeseen costs, even if the fixed price plan ends up costing more than a variable pricing structure would.</p>
<p>The article also goes into how stupid expensive text message rates are subsidising falling voice revenues, how wireless carriers would love to stop subsidising phones, and more.</p>
<p>I know the average Gizmodo reader would like nothing more than to pay as little per minute as possible, but the average consumer thinks differently.</p>
<p>What&#8217;s interesting is that this wholesale mentality does work, at least in terms of raw pricing. One minute of talk time costs 5c, and the average text message costs 1c. According to the article, that&#8217;s the lowest average pricing in the developed world. The minutes do come at a bulk discount, it&#8217;s just a matter of whether or not you use all of them.</p>
<p>I&#8217;ll leave it to you commenters to discuss, but it&#8217;s a good read into how wireless pricing in America got so complicated. [<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/15/business/15price.html?partner=rss&#038;emc=rss">New York Times</a>]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2009/11/why-u-s-wireless-pricing-sucks/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Do Verizon Phones Have Intentional Design &#8220;Flaws&#8221; That Scam You?</title>
		<link>http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2009/11/do-verizon-phones-have-intentional-design-flaws-that-scam-you/</link>
		<comments>http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2009/11/do-verizon-phones-have-intentional-design-flaws-that-scam-you/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 13 Nov 2009 21:53:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Sean Fallon</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Phones]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[data charges]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ethics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[mobile phones]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Networks]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[scams]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[verizon]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.gizmodo.com.au/?p=366927</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Have you ever been hit with a $US1.99 data charge on your Verizon bill for accidentally hitting a button that connects you to &#8220;Get It Now&#8221; or &#8220;Mobile Web?&#8221; This design &#8220;flaw&#8221; might be netting Verizon $US300 million per year.
A tipster writing to David Pogue claims to work at Verizon, and he explained his own [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a rel="lytebox" href="http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/gizmodo/2009/11/keypad.jpg"><img src="http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/4/2009/11/500x_keypad.jpg" alt="" class="left" /></a>Have you ever been hit with a $US1.99 data charge on your Verizon bill for accidentally hitting a button that connects you to &#8220;Get It Now&#8221; or &#8220;Mobile Web?&#8221; This design &#8220;flaw&#8221; might be netting Verizon $US300 million per year.<span id="more-366927"></span></p>
<p>A tipster writing to <a href="http://pogue.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/11/12/verizon-how-much-do-you-charge-now/">David Pogue</a> claims to work at Verizon, and he explained his own moral frustration with the problem:<div class="clear-fix"></div></p>
<blockquote><p> &#8220;The phone is designed in such a way that you can almost never avoid getting $US1.99 charge on the bill. Around the OK button on a typical flip phone are the up, down, left, right arrows. If you open the flip and accidentally press the up arrow key, you see that the phone starts to connect to the web. So you hit END right away. Well, too late. You will be charged $US1.99 for that 0.02 kilobytes of data. NOT COOL. I&#8217;ve had phones for years, and I sometimes do that mistake to this day, as I&#8217;m sure you have. Legal, yes; ethical, NO.</p>
<p>&#8220;Every month, the 87 million customers will accidentally hit that key a few times a month! That&#8217;s over $US300 million per month in data revenue off a simple mistake!</p>
<p>&#8220;Our marketing, billing, and technical departments are all aware of this. But they have failed to do anything about it-and why? Because if you get 87 million customers to pay $US1.99, why stop this revenue? Customer Service might credit you if you call and complain, but this practice is just not right.</p>
<p>&#8220;Now, you can ask to have this feature blocked. But even then, if you one of those buttons by accident, your phone transmits data; you get a message that you cannot use the service because it&#8217;s blocked–BUT you just used 0.06 kilobytes of data to get that message, so you are now charged $US1.99 again!</p>
<p>&#8220;They have started training us reps that too many data blocks are being put on accounts now; they&#8217;re actually making us take classes called Alternatives to Data Blocks. They do not want all the blocks, because 40% of Verizon&#8217;s revenue now comes from data use. I just know there are millions of people out there that don&#8217;t even notice this $US1.99 on the bill.&#8221;</p>
</blockquote>
<p> Pogue notes that others have written in who are on different networks that have experienced similar problems. So this shady data charge scam might not be exclusive to Verizon &mdash; although they do have have a <a href="http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2009/11/more-details-on-verizons-us350-early-termination-policy/">reputation for pricing policies that many would deem &#8220;excessive&#8221;.</a> [<a href="http://pogue.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/11/12/verizon-how-much-do-you-charge-now/">Pogue's Posts</a> via <a href="http://consumerist.com/5403962/verizon-configures-phones-so-you-incur-erroenous-data-charges-to-the-tune-of-300-million">Consumerist</a> Image via <a href="http://www.phonearena.com/htmls/First-images-of-Motorola-V750-for-Verizon-article-a_2661.html">PhoneArena</a>]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2009/11/do-verizon-phones-have-intentional-design-flaws-that-scam-you/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>More Details On Verizon&#8217;s $US350 Early Termination Policy</title>
		<link>http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2009/11/more-details-on-verizons-us350-early-termination-policy/</link>
		<comments>http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2009/11/more-details-on-verizons-us350-early-termination-policy/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 12 Nov 2009 23:15:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Wilson Rothman</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Networks]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Business]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[contracts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[fees]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[retail]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[verizon]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.gizmodo.com.au/?p=366625</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[As you probably heard, Verizon Wireless is imposing a pretty nasty $US350 early termination fee on its more impressive phones. It&#8217;s confirmed and starts Sunday, so you might want to buy your phone now if possible.
The good news, if there is any, is that the early termination fee only applies to early termination. Surprised you [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As you <a href="http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2009/11/verizon-to-double-early-termination-fee/">probably heard</a>, Verizon Wireless is imposing a pretty nasty $US350 early termination fee on its more impressive phones. It&#8217;s confirmed and starts Sunday, so you might want to buy your phone now if possible.<span id="more-366625"></span></p>
<p>The good news, if there is any, is that the early termination fee only applies to early termination. Surprised you there, didn&#8217;t it? The bad news is, <a href="http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2009/11/verizon-to-double-early-termination-fee/">what Mark said</a> about the ditch fee being $US110 in the 23rd month is true. And pretty much anything you&#8217;d want to buy from Verizon these days &mdash; not just Droids and BlackBerrys but netbooks too &mdash; are locked into this new fee.</p>
<p>Verizon is pretty clear that this is about recouping the cost of the subsidy; a gadget lands on the &#8220;advanced&#8221; list when it has a combination of features that &#8220;drive up the cost&#8221;. Only wireless modems and dumbphones (below referred to as feature phones) appear to be exempt. Here are the details from a spokesman:</p>
<blockquote><p>The higher tier of early termination fee applies to a device category that generally includes smartphones, netbooks and other advanced devices purchased at a subsidized price under contract. Please remember, feature phones still carry a $US175 early termination fee when purchased at a subsidized price with a new customer agreement.</p>
<p>Advanced devices include a combination of advanced capabilities that combined drive up the cost of the device, including premium HTML browser; high-resolution MP camera with optical zoom; dual processor chipsets; WiFi; very high-resolution displays, and/or operating systems such as BlackBerry, Windows Mobile, Palm, or Android. The category also includes netbooks. (Modems will still carry a $US175 ETF.)</p>
<p>We are informing customers at the point of purchase/contract renewal&mdash;whether on line, in person or over the phone. On Sunday, when the new EFT takes effect, we will post the list of advanced devices.</p>
<p>By the way, it is important to note that this change has no impact on customers with previously signed contracts, and as a practical matter has no impact on the majority of customers who choose to complete the terms of their contracts. </p>
<p>Remember, if you sign a long-term contract and complete it, there&#8217;s no early termination fee. In addition, customers always have the option of buying any device at full retail without an early termination fee.</p>
</blockquote>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2009/11/more-details-on-verizons-us350-early-termination-policy/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
