Verizon has begun airing “breakaway,” the company’s first TV commercial for Apple’s revolutionary iPad on U.S. broadcast and cable networks.
The spots’ tag states: “Introducing iPad… on Verizon. All the magic of iPad. All the nationwide power and reliability of Verizon.”
MacDailyNews Take: Precursor.
The Apple Original Film ‘Still: A Michael J. Fox Movie’ is honored among the first batch of Peabody Award nominees…
Apple is reportedly developing its own artificial intelligence server processor using TSMC’s 3nm process, with mass production to begin by…
Apple has cut its 2024 Vision Pro shipments as demand in the U.S. market has fallen sharply beyond expectations…
Apple is widely expected to introduce a new 12.9-inch iPad Air model at its just-announced “Let Loose” special event on May 7th. That…
Apple has announced it will be holding a special event on Tuesday, May 7th at 7am PDT / 10am EDT. Apple is widely expected to announce…
So much negative ink has been spilled on AT&T over the years, Verison will have a field day when it stars for real.
Well, what about that Sprint commercial for an iPhone running on WiMax? Wouldn’t you think that would be more of a ‘precursor’ than an ad for a remotely related device?
I saw this bit of news on Electronista and was wondering how soon will this be interpreted as another ‘sign’ that Verizon iPhone is imminent. Didn’t take long…
Not bad for Verizon. Although the actor looks like a dufus.
Now if they could just do something about lowering my bill.
. . . And maybe enable us to speak with another live person when we call for service.
Has anyone noticed how service for landlines has become obnoxious? Do you think, perhaps, they are trying to discourage them? Shouldn’t we watch carefully if somehow legislation comes forward to take away the “utilities” designation for landlines?
Remember THE PRESIDENT’S ANALYST ?
I think what is interesting is that Verizon is doing an ad – when was the last time AT&T did an ad for the iPhone or iPad? All the iPhone ads I have ever seen were done by Apple.
I wonder if that was part of the contract… with either carrier.
I’m sure Apple played a big part in concept and requirements for that ad.. It plays and feels just like an Apple commercial…
I don’t think Apple had contributed anything more than they contributed to the Sprint’s commercial for iPhone on WiMax some time ago. In other words, other than getting cleared by Apple’s legal team, I doubt that there was any further involvement. It is in Verizon’s own interest to make the ad look somewhat like Apple’s; why not ride the coat tails of the most successful marketing machine on the planet?
…”All the iPhone ads I have ever seen were done by Apple.”
Except for that Sprint commercial for the iPhone. They were actually advertising their WiMax hotspot device, but you could easily mistake it for an iPhone ad…
The ad was fine, but here’s my real kudos for Verizon:
I’ve owned an iPad since the day they came out. And back in August I bought that mifi device from Verizon. My plan was awful, but I paid it anyway — $39.95 for a meager 250 mb of data on a one-year contract.
Then came the announcement of the “Verizon iPad” deal, which has MUCH cheaper data plans.
Legally, I was stuck with my previous contract. But without any need for me to raise my voice, Verizon upped me to 3 gigs of data and dropped the price by five dollars.
It’s still expensive, but when was the last time your carrier volunteered to give you 12 times the data for five dollars less?
Recall that Apple requires that the Verizon check mark or name cannot b
I’m pretty sure I read that the AT&T exclusivity contract stipulated that Apple would oversee all advertising. (In addition, one of the requirements is that AT&T could run iPhone ads as well as ads for other phones, but never mix an iPhone into a group phone ad.) I suspect a lot of this needs to drop away when the iPhone is no longer tied to one character.
(Non-U.S. MDN readers: How do multiple carriers tend to advertise iPhone in Europe and elsewhere?)
Okay, spell checker, I know I typed “carrier,” not “character.”
You’re tied to their service & device for two years not the plan. You can change that all you want. But glad things worked out for you. Version was horrible to me but thank goodness my work pays the bill.
I would like to recommend the Virgin Mobile MIFI.
No contract. $40/unlimited. Pay as you go. Works really well with iPad.
be branded on either the iPhone or the iPad. Same for AT&T.
It does not follow that because they received e iPad, that they will get the iPhone 4 any time soon unless Apple does allow the development of the dual CDMA & GSM chips. I am not sure they would both fit into the smaller iPhone format. And, the MiFi 2200 that Verizon bundles is slow for those of us used to higher speeds with AT&T’s HSPA+, far faster than the 2200 is capable of.
And besides, AT&T has better customer service than Verizon and both have areas when one’s signal strength is better than the other and vice versa. In Texas, AT&T is far better with faster 3G than Verizon.
Also, who in their right mind would want a CDMA phone that does not work all ocher the world? It will be interesting if AT&T churn rate will be very high when Verizon does get the iPhone, which is obviously at some time. Hopefully it be when both carriers use LTE.
The Virgin MiFi is still the very slow MiFi as Verizon. Much better off with AT&T for better 3G speed.
@macromancer… I second that recommendation. I had originally bought a 3G iPad, but my latest two purchases (my wife and my employee) have been wifi only because of the terrible data plan offerings from ATT. Unfortunately, the Virgin Mobile MiFi works on the Sprint 3G network… but it’s better than ATT in my area and cheaper (and the only option for unlimited).
They seem to imply that you need Verizon’s mifi in order for the iPad to connect to the internet, even though you don’t need Verizon at all. Just use wifi.
rbutler222:
Due to fundamental differences in technology between GSM and CDMA (and their respective high-speed data flavours), CDMA has better penetration through obstacles than GSM. The result is better coverage with same/similar towers/cells. AT&T must spend considerably more than Verizon for similar coverage quality. Add to that the “Not in my backyard” mentality as a significant obstacle to expanding coverage by building more towers, and you can see how even with all the iPhone money, AT&T is still struggling to get coverage in some areas.
Vast majority of Americans don’t travel abroad with their cellphones. Actually, many of them don’t even have passports. For them, GSM has no significance. They only care about one thing: service/coverage. Whoever has best coverage wins.
Will Verizon allow Skype to work over that MiFi on my iPad with no 3G?
“Can you browse me now?”
Verizon took the bait!
To all the Verizon iPhone envy sufferers… Your day will come.
Hang in there!
Aah at last someone even if accidentally references the idea that without walls you don’t need Windows. Interesting insight as to how Apple could have done it.
@NDK61
I blame many people – the members of the Bush administration and blind supporters in Congress through 2006 most of all. You must just live in the moment to delude yourself into believing anything that you post. Talk about a reality distortion field…