Print 66 comment(s) - last by TO.. on Nov 6 at 10:48 AM

AT&T has had enough of Verizon's commercials.

Early last month, Verizon began assaulting AT&T with new commercials which were an interesting twist on the AT&T-backed iPhone "There's a app for that" commercials. Verizon turned the ads around to point out all of the holes in AT&T's 3G coverage and numerous dropped calls that have been reported with the service.

The Verizon commercials came right on the heels of reports that a 30 percent dropped call rate in New York City for the iPhone was considered "normal".

It was only a matter of time, but it appears that AT&T has had enough of Verizon's commercials which mock its 3G coverage in the United States. According to the Wall Street Journal, AT&T is going after Verizon with a lawsuit.

AT&T noted the following according to Engadget:

In essence, we believe the ads mislead consumers into believing that AT&T doesn't offer ANY wireless service in the vast majority of the country. In fact, AT&T's wireless network blankets the US, reaching approximately 296M people. Additionally, our 3G service is available in over 9,600 cities and towns. Verizon's misleading advertising tactics appear to be a response to AT&T's strong leadership in smartphones. We have twice the number of smartphone customers... and we've beaten them two quarters in a row on net post-paid subscribers. We also had lower churn -- a sign that customers are quite happy with the service they receive.

According to the WSJ, AT&T had complained to Verizon about the appearance of a lack of coverage in large parts of the U.S. in the ads, but the changes Verizon made to its spots weren't enough for AT&T, hence the lawsuit.

For its part in the matter, Verizon spokesman Jim Gerace responded, “Our ads clearly explain that non-3G coverage is available elsewhere. I think it's interesting that AT&T's chose to focus on the white areas and not the blues area of their map. We think it calls into question their own fastest 3G claim as the map clearly shows where 3G doesn't exist."

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

How should they depict it?
By ICBM on 11/3/2009 5:26:22 PM , Rating: 5
Red/Blue = 3G Coverage
White = No 3G Coverage

Man that is complicated; I don't think I can wrap my head around that one. Somebody should sue them for making something so complicated!

RE: How should they depict it?
By Alexstarfire on 11/3/09, Rating: -1
RE: How should they depict it?
By dubldwn on 11/3/2009 7:08:11 PM , Rating: 5
No, that's not what they're arguing about. That's what some people in this thread are arguing about. AT&T is not claiming that edge is 3G. AT&T is claiming that the white areas of the map might make people believe there is NO coverage there at all. Which is ridiculous.

RE: How should they depict it?
By 67STANG on 11/3/2009 7:22:30 PM , Rating: 2
Claiming "the nations fastest 3G network" when their radius of reliable 3G coverage is ~10 square miles of the nation...

RE: How should they depict it?
By dubldwn on 11/3/2009 7:28:17 PM , Rating: 4
Agreed, but that claim is far more ambiguous. Everything in Verizon's commercial is fact and saying people are so stupid they would think the white areas mean no coverage is, imo, a baseless lawsuit. AT&T blows.

Sent from my iPhone

RE: How should they depict it?
By 67STANG on 11/4/2009 10:31:33 AM , Rating: 2
Even though the maps clearly state they are depicting 3G coverage? You can't honestly expect a consumer to understand.

RE: How should they depict it?
By Alexstarfire on 11/3/2009 7:28:20 PM , Rating: 3
Could be both. Quite frankly if the consumers are stupid enough not to realize that you don't have to have 3G to make calls then that's their own fault. Seems like companies get sued a lot these days because they try to protect the ignorant masses. I say let the consumers educate themselves so we can end these damn shenanigans already.

RE: How should they depict it?
By sprockkets on 11/3/2009 10:23:18 PM , Rating: 1
Agreed. The "sad" person in the commercial with a white iphone makes it look like she hasn't got any calls or can't do anything period because of the small coverage of 3G. If there is no 3G coverage, any 3G phone just drops to GSM/EDGE.

Though some say when phones, including the iphone do that, it creams the battery life.

RE: How should they depict it?
By Fenixgoon on 11/4/2009 10:37:19 AM , Rating: 2
actually if you go to AT&T's website and click "show 3g coverage" you'll find that the figure in verizon's commercial isn't very far off. i checked it myself after i saw the commercials.

3G coverage shown in blue:

RE: How should they depict it?
By TO on 11/6/2009 10:48:47 AM , Rating: 2
That's funny because the map shows 3G throughout NYC, but my phone will display 3G here about 20% of the time. I guess the 3G network is so overloaded that my phone reverts back to edge a majority of the time.

AT&T Service
By dtm4trix on 11/3/2009 6:25:27 PM , Rating: 2
I have had my iPhone since it first came out and while I love the phone itself the coverage and service area sucks. I get no reception in many areas that my friends with Verizon or Sprint do. Therefore I think the ads, while maybe a little deceptive, are fairly accurate. I will not renew my subscription when my contract is up and am waiting for someone other than AT&T to roll out with the iPhone.

RE: AT&T Service
By StraightPipe on 11/3/2009 6:50:04 PM , Rating: 2
Same here. I've got 35 lines (mostly Blackberries) through AT+T at work and we were doing just fine on EDGE. When they upgraded the network to 3G (2 months ago...after promising it in late 2007) it destroyed our service quality.

Let me get this straight: we are in a city and have great signal (4 bars right now, usually 5).

When we try to dial out: Call Failed, dial again: Call failed... I usually see this message 20-30 times a day.

When I get a call to connect: they frequently drop about 1 minute after the call starts...then I've got to try dialing failed.

When someone calls me: straight to Voice Mail. Hours later my phone will say I have missed 4 calls...and have 7 VM's...How can I have 7 VM's if I only missed 4 calls (and the phone didnt ring one time).

Just this last week some of the "failed call" messages have changed to "congestion" so at least they are beginning to be honest with the customers...

Tech support has us do test calls and all of the calls fail during the test. We've got a variety of devices (BB Curve, BB Bold, BB 8820, iPhones, Moto RAZR and RAZR2) and the same problems with all of them.

My Service rep has even admitted that it's a congestion problem...likely caused by the iPhone flood.

RE: AT&T Service
By mcnabney on 11/3/2009 10:09:06 PM , Rating: 2
Why do you put up with that crap?

Port out, and if they can't deliver - port out of them too. I think everyone has a 30 trial period now.

RE: AT&T Service
By The0ne on 11/4/2009 6:24:24 AM , Rating: 2
That's the other thing about AT&T signal that people AREN'T talking about. Even if you have 2-4 bars that doesn't mean you're going to be able to make calls. I hate this "trickery" the most. It's so fustrating. If you have 2-4 bars why the hell wouldn't it be able to dial out and/or connect? That is just stupid imo.

I'm glad my contract has been over. Just doing research another company that I will be switching too; that and waiting for the new phones to come out :D

RE: AT&T Service
By zerocool84 on 11/3/2009 7:11:34 PM , Rating: 2
I just think it's sad that people want the iPhone so bad that they are willing to put up with a sub-par network that gets horrible coverage. No phone no matter how good is no use on a network like AT&T. I know people with iPhones that bought Mifi's and use them as web access since AT&T gets crappy reception.

RE: AT&T Service
By teng029 on 11/3/2009 11:57:11 PM , Rating: 2
i have both an at&t phone (iphone) and a verizon phone (BB Tour). take away the phones' bells and whistles and compare just the coverage; verizon's coverage is far superior to that of at&t. there are spots in the phoenix area that are just flat out dead zones for at&t and yet verizon gets decent coverage.

RE: AT&T Service
By Adul on 11/4/2009 12:59:04 AM , Rating: 2
indeed i get service just fine with sprint in phoenix, but someone with an iphone at my place. 1 bar outside of the house..

RE: AT&T Service
By wempa on 11/4/2009 12:34:26 PM , Rating: 2
This is exactly why my wife and I have been reluctant to get an iPhone. Everybody I know who owns an iPhone complains about the coverage and also the network congestion they experience in densely populated areas. Sorry, but the phone functionality is the most important to me. I'll either wait until iPhone moves to Verizon's network or I'll get another smart phone.

"Broadband" Definition
By Shig on 11/3/2009 6:18:19 PM , Rating: 2
The FCC needs to step in and just put it's foot down and say : The speed has to be at least "x" to be considered 3G. Broadband speeds are so poorly defined in the US that these marketing jokes happen.

I say the FCC is to blame. Step up and say what is 3G and what isn't ffs. Or this is just going to go back and forth like two little kids fighting over a toy.

RE: "Broadband" Definition
By zorxd on 11/3/2009 6:55:17 PM , Rating: 2
I have a better idea. We drop the #G terminology, which doesn't mean anything anyways, and start talking about Mbps, just like any other internet connection.
A 21 Mbps network is 3x faster than a 7Mbps network even if both are "3G".

RE: "Broadband" Definition
By Alexstarfire on 11/3/2009 6:58:54 PM , Rating: 2
It actually does, but ok. HSPA is actually 3.5G. The halves mean they are just upgraded from the current network, usually software or something with little to no hardware changes needed.

RE: "Broadband" Definition
By dubldwn on 11/3/2009 7:12:37 PM , Rating: 2
Well, the best we'll probably get is something like "up to 7mbps."

RE: "Broadband" Definition
By StevoLincolnite on 11/4/2009 12:16:26 AM , Rating: 2
The speed has to be at least "x" to be considered 3G.

Then what companies will do is create silly names for there products like NextG or YesG (Taken from the Aussie Telco's naming.)

Then advertise how "Superior" they are, hence we will end up back in square 1.

I do feel sorry for the USA and there rather poor "3G" Networks, both in-terms of coverage and speed.

RE: "Broadband" Definition
By gamerk2 on 11/4/2009 11:18:57 AM , Rating: 2
Actually, the telecoms are trying to get broadband defined as 56k speeds (down from 768k).

So yes, AOL would offer broadband to all its customers. :D

2 Errors in summary
By 91TTZ on 11/3/2009 4:59:51 PM , Rating: 2
Early last month, Verizon began assaulting AT&T with new commercials which where an interesting twist on the AT&T-backed iPhone "There's a map for that" commercials.

It should read:

Verizon began assaulting AT&T with new commercials which were an interesting twist on the AT&T-backed iPhone "There's an app for that" commercials.

RE: 2 Errors in summary
By Brandon Hill on 11/3/2009 5:01:59 PM , Rating: 4
Brain Farts -- don't try this at home :)

RE: 2 Errors in summary
By Alexstarfire on 11/3/2009 6:26:37 PM , Rating: 2
Are they explosive or something? :P

They must have the same lawyers
By MonkeyPaw on 11/3/2009 5:53:40 PM , Rating: 5
Isn't it funny that both AT&T and Apple like to send in the lawyers when a competitor makes their products look bad? There's nothing worse than the guy who can dish it out but can't take it.

RE: They must have the same lawyers
By Alexstarfire on 11/3/09, Rating: -1
By mcnabney on 11/3/2009 10:13:15 PM , Rating: 2
EDGE does not count. It is between 150-200kbs. 1XRTT is 120-150 and it doesn't count either.

3G starts with EVDO rev 0 which is 768kbs and goes up from there. Rev A is faster, as is the HSDPA and WCDMA.

WIMAX and LTE are 4G, so I don't see the confusion. 0.5 to 5 mps are considered 3G. From 5-20mps is 4G.

By BillyBatson on 11/4/2009 12:02:06 AM , Rating: 2
"- a sign that customers are quite happy with the service they receive."

however this is not true, I HATE AT&T and their horrible service compared to even Sprint who I was with for 6.5 years and was ALWAYS super pleased.

By The0ne on 11/4/2009 6:28:42 AM , Rating: 2
Customer service is a shot in the dark. You get good ones and you get really horrible ones...on any network. I would have burn down the T-mobile office here if I was crazy enough. That's how terrible my experience with T-Mobile was. But I get good signals so that was a good thing hehe They are definitely not counted out as a provider again just because of a few...well, many, bad CSRs.

Dropped calls?
By wushuktl on 11/4/2009 7:01:24 AM , Rating: 2
I guess I am the lucky one, I can not remember the last time I had a dropped call or not enough signal strength to make a clear call. AT&T is fine in Baltimore and Washington area

RE: Dropped calls?
By b744 on 11/4/2009 9:40:22 AM , Rating: 2
I haven't had any issues either, I live in the dallas/fortworth metroplex.

I understood their ads perfectly
By CZroe on 11/3/2009 5:23:46 PM , Rating: 3
I understood their ads perfectly. 3G != their entire wireless network. That said, insufficient 3G coverage does lead to unreliability. I can't tell you how many times something dropped, bombed, or stopped loading because it decided to jump from a full-strength Edge connection to a barely-there 3G connection or vice-versa. Even in San Diego it makes sense to just turn 3G off.

By kattanna on 11/3/2009 4:57:26 PM , Rating: 2
In essence, we believe our ads mislead consumers into believing that AT&T offers the best customer service in the vast majority of the country

there.. now more accurate

By chick0n on 11/4/2009 1:21:05 AM , Rating: 2
I FINALLY got rid of AT&T and went T-mobile. wow. night and day difference.

I have had enough of AT&T's bullshit for the last 2 years. Drops calls everywhere. network busy, no signal, etc. hmm, did I mention that I live in big city called NYC? and this shouldn't happen? wow. you guys wont believe how many "Dead" spots I found in NYC.

T-mobile, I used to be its customer before I switch to AT&T for the rebates (biggest mistake), guess what, I went back to the same "dead" spot, and wow, full bars. and no drop calls when going thru williamsburg bridge ! holy mother. damn it.

Im not a Verizon customer cuz their phones are butt ugly, but seriously if they need someone to proof that AT&T's services are nothing but garbage. I be happy to help.

By bkslopper on 11/4/2009 10:29:58 AM , Rating: 2
AT&T should put up or shut up. While the iPhone is neat, I'd never buy a phone that doesn't work well as a phone. Then again, I'm still clinging to land lines, so what does it matter to me? I think I've just wasted 3 seconds of my life.

By BruceLeet on 11/4/2009 10:32:02 AM , Rating: 2
Well 3G was lastG I'm 100% satisfied with my BB Tour & HSPA+ network.

Recent iPhone troubles
By Ardlay on 11/4/2009 12:35:00 PM , Rating: 2
I recently went through dropped calls worse then I have ever dealt with on any network. It was after I had my iphone replaced due to volume button breaking.

Basically guaranteed dropped call inside of 5 min, if call could even go through. Then a required reboot to make it work again.

Back and forth with AT&T and Apple. With AT&T not able to do a thing other then acknowledge an issue exists. And Apple geniuses telling me it was AT&T problem and their diagnostics not showing an issue. Saying that even if they replaced the iPhone it wouldn't help.

Well after 3 days of back and forth with AT&T and Apple. Apple replaced the phone. Guess what. My dropped call percentage dropped from nearly 100% to less than 5%.

It was the iPhone hardware.

Not PC to defend AT&T But...
By Sahrin on 11/3/09, Rating: -1
RE: Not PC to defend AT&T But...
By Reclaimer77 on 11/3/2009 6:13:29 PM , Rating: 5
It doesn't matter how fast, advanced or technological something is if it doesn't work when you need it to. The end user doesn't care, they just want their phones to work.

Verizon > AT&T

RE: Not PC to defend AT&T But...
By The0ne on 11/4/2009 6:11:58 AM , Rating: 2
Personally my AT&T signal sucks horribly in San Diego, yes here. I can drive from downtown to north county and still have 2 bars only and often connections are noisy or I lose calls. My co-workers are the same, with their iphones although not as severe as mine. But the one co-worker with his old pone on Verizon gets good signals and clean calls.

As you said, you can have the best phone but if it doesn't work as a phone most of the time what's the point in having one.

RE: Not PC to defend AT&T But...
By IcePickFreak on 11/3/2009 6:21:33 PM , Rating: 3
It also sucks that the community is jumping all over AT&T as well - why put down the guy who's trying to roll out the best service?

Really? I have never personally met anyone that used AT&T wireless and was happy with it. We use to go through them at work and, go figure, the service was horrible while at work. You'd think they could handle locking down the 90 mile corridor between Milwaukee & Chicago.

RE: Not PC to defend AT&T But...
By Alexstarfire on 11/3/09, Rating: 0
RE: Not PC to defend AT&T But...
By bissimo on 11/3/2009 6:40:58 PM , Rating: 2
I can attest that AT&T sucks in DFW. TONS of dropped calls, spotty coverage, etc. I switched to Verizon over a year ago and have had ZERO issues with coverage.

RE: Not PC to defend AT&T But...
By Alexstarfire on 11/3/09, Rating: -1
RE: Not PC to defend AT&T But...
By rs2 on 11/4/2009 2:51:47 AM , Rating: 3
I love how "the [3G] coverage for my phone is just fine in DFW" is followed almost immediately by "I don't use 3G on my phone at all [because] my phone messed it up somehow". Yeah, I guess that would make you the authority on AT&T's 3G coverage in DFW, seeing as how it doesn't work at all for you for some reason that you've decided to blame upon the phone instead of the network.

Contradict yourself much?

RE: Not PC to defend AT&T But...
By Alexstarfire on 11/4/09, Rating: 0
RE: Not PC to defend AT&T But...
By neogrin on 11/4/2009 11:13:25 AM , Rating: 2
You are responding to a dicussion about 3G and dropped calls and you state you don't get dropped calls in a specific area. It is Obvious (to anyone but you) that you meant that you don't get dropped called using 3G.

It's not our fault you can't make an coherent statement.

If you are trying state something, the ownes is on you to be understandable, within the context of the overall discussion. Otherwise you might as well just roll you face on the keyboard as the results would be the same.

RE: Not PC to defend AT&T But...
By akse on 11/4/2009 6:30:40 AM , Rating: 2
Haha.. laughed!
"I suggest looking at your phone then because the coverage for my phone is just fine in DFW"

"Which is cause my phone messed it up somehow."

Mm.. maybe look at your phone!

RE: Not PC to defend AT&T But...
By teldar on 11/3/2009 7:21:16 PM , Rating: 2
My brother lives in Monroe, Mi and cannot get service in his house. He works for Magna in a Detroit office, mostly at Ford, and can't get decent service frequently at work or in plants.
My cousin lives in Columbus. He can't get service in his house. In Columbus, OH. He frequently had complained that he couldn't get service anywhere he went.

I (mostly)live in Columbus (some in Cinci for a few more weeks) and hear from classmates who have bad service with AT&T. I (obviously) talk to my brother quite a bit.
The number of dropped calls when talking to my brother and to my cousin when he had AT&T was awful.
I've never had AT&T. Sprint, SBC before they bought AT&T, Nextel (before they were bought by sprint), yes. AT&T, no.
I have Verizon now. I don't see any way I would ever switch. Verizon's coverage is better than everything else out there.

And if the Droid is everything it looks like it should be....

RE: Not PC to defend AT&T But...
By mcnabney on 11/3/2009 9:55:52 PM , Rating: 2
The Droid is amazing. I have used it and I have never wanted a device so much. And apparently there is no Verizon degradations - navigation, video, mail... and cinemascreen 480p screen and the ability to shoot video at the same resolution. The only possible thing missing is quadband for global roaming, but I imagine that a version with that will follow.

Also, AT&T doesn't have a legal leg to stand on. The Ad is very clear in stating 3G coverage. AT&T is just pissy because they can feel the inertia swinging. I really feel sorry for Sprint, with their Pre exclusive coming to an end and continuing to bleed customers and post the tenth quarterly loss.

RE: Not PC to defend AT&T But...
By FITCamaro on 11/4/2009 8:38:40 AM , Rating: 2
I'm planning to get one hopefully this weekend.

By IcePickFreak on 11/3/2009 8:38:17 PM , Rating: 3
Well, maybe it just sucks in your area then.

That was kind of my point. We're within a few miles of the interstate. It's less than 100 miles by car from downtown to downtown of two major cities. That's not promising for the 80+% of the country that isn't a major city.

RE: Not PC to defend AT&T But...
By agentcooper on 11/3/2009 10:00:45 PM , Rating: 2
I live in the Bay Area, Oakland exactly. I work in Berkeley. AT&T absolutely blows here. When I type in my address on the AT&T coverage locator it says I'm in the 3G and strong reception area. Ha! I'm lucky if I can get a signal at home. Work is spotty - one room great, the next room no service.

I'll be switching back to Verizon as soon as I'm able to.

RE: Not PC to defend AT&T But...
By mikeyD95125 on 11/4/2009 12:44:43 AM , Rating: 2
Yeah I live in San Jose. Somehow AT&T manages to mess this part of the Bay Area up to. My friends get dropped calls frequently. I live half a mile from a tower in a completely suburban area and my whole block is somehow a dead zone. I'm not sure how they cannot provide coverage to a fairly dense, flat, suburban city. It seems like the ideal place to setup a network. At least Verizon has figured it out.

By Alexstarfire on 11/4/2009 3:21:54 AM , Rating: 2
I can't say much about San Jose today, but I didn't have a problem with AT&T/Cingular when I was there in '04.

RE: Not PC to defend AT&T But...
By UNCjigga on 11/4/2009 9:02:21 AM , Rating: 2
Agreed. I'm pretty sure the ITU set a 2mbps peak minimum in their definition of 3G, so EDGE does not qualify. Also, I'm pretty confident (98%?) that in all areas where Verizon has EVDO coverage, they've upgraded to Rev A by now (not sure about recently acquired Alltel markets?) The trick is that not all Verizon's phones are Rev A capable (so those are stuck at Rev 0.)

RE: Not PC to defend AT&T But...
By Sahrin on 11/3/2009 7:49:53 PM , Rating: 2
Really? I have never personally met anyone that used AT&T wireless and was happy with it. We use to go through them at work and, go figure, the service was horrible while at work. You'd think they could handle locking down the 90 mile corridor between Milwaukee & Chicago.

I suppose I meant technologically superior by 'best' and not 'quality.' You can put me down on the list of people who have tried AT&T service, Verizon service, Sprint service and T-mobile service (in 2 differen 2 million+ metro areas) and found the AT&T to be the best in terms of throughput and reliability. If I had to rank them it would be AT&T, T-Mobile, Sprint, Verizon. Verizon didn't have any problems per se, but every other service had something outstanding about (AT&T is data speed, coverage and reliability; T-mobile was price) where Verizon was completely underwhelming. Their data service in particular sucked (even though my area was supposed to have RevB); again, not in terms of coverage (it was fine there) but in terms of throughput. It was just clearly technologically inferior to everyone elses.

RE: Not PC to defend AT&T But...
By hyvonen on 11/3/2009 9:02:30 PM , Rating: 3
Exactly what's happening to me. Even worse, my Samsung Eternity cannot be forced to stay with Edge. The 3G signal is AWFUL so I get no signal, except for those super lucky moments when it switches to Edge.

I constantly lose phone calls because of this. 3G with zero bars is no 3G.

RE: Not PC to defend AT&T But...
By roostitup on 11/4/2009 6:07:16 AM , Rating: 2
Been using ATT for 10 years now in both rural and developed areas with no problems. I keep going back to them and am never disappointed. People who already have a negative opinion of ATT tend to subconsciously only pay attention to other negative opinions that people have, which therefore replaces the actual facts with their own opinion.

RE: Not PC to defend AT&T But...
By The0ne on 11/4/2009 6:19:12 AM , Rating: 2
I don't think many of us are "subconsciously only pay(ing) attention to other negative opinions..." We are currently on the network, for 2 years or more and the signal just sucks...period. Read the thread, you have issues in major cities like San Diego, Oakland, and San Jose.

Do I feel bad when my co-worker, on his Verizon phone, can make calls and I can't? Sure, cause I'm paying to have the phone work! I have the 8525 phone and it's a good phone but almost useless simply because of weak AT&T signals.

RE: Not PC to defend AT&T But...
By wempa on 11/4/2009 12:39:54 PM , Rating: 2
I never had a "negative" opinion of AT&T. In fact, I had them for cell phone service years back and they weren't bad. However, when just about EVERY person I know who has an iPhone complains about the coverage and the network congestion, that doesn't exactly make me feel like switching to AT&T.

RE: Not PC to defend AT&T But...
By walk2k on 11/3/2009 7:44:52 PM , Rating: 2
Agreed AT&T sucks so bad all my friends with I-phones are always complaining but my Sprint phone which can roam on Verizon just works.

RE: Not PC to defend AT&T But...
By NesuD on 11/3/2009 11:12:30 PM , Rating: 2
Hmm well I'm sitting here looking at a 3G coverage map on AT&Ts website and it looks identical to what Verizon shows in their commercials. Guess that blows a few holes in your reasoning. AT&T hasn't a leg to stand on. it is just a PR lawsuit. They can't win and likely don't expect to.

"My sex life is pretty good" -- Steve Jobs' random musings during the 2010 D8 conference
Related Articles

Latest Headlines
Inspiron Laptops & 2-in-1 PCs
September 25, 2016, 9:00 AM
The Samsung Galaxy S7
September 14, 2016, 6:00 AM
Apple Watch 2 – Coming September 7th
September 3, 2016, 6:30 AM
Apple says “See you on the 7th.”
September 1, 2016, 6:30 AM

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki