Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Verizon sued for crippling Bluetooth in Motorola v710

Last response: in Network Providers
Share
Anonymous
January 14, 2005 2:14:47 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular,alt.cellular,alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

One can not transfer files (such as pictures taken) with the bluetooth
as configured in the Verizon model of the Motorola v710..
Upset users are suing:

<http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&ncid=1293&e...
/tc_nm/telecoms_verizonwireless_lawsuit_dc&sid=95573419>
Anonymous
January 14, 2005 2:14:48 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular,alt.cellular,alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

Jack Zwick wrote:
> One can not transfer files (such as pictures taken) with the bluetooth
> as configured in the Verizon model of the Motorola v710..
> Upset users are suing:
>
> <http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&ncid=1293&e...
> /tc_nm/telecoms_verizonwireless_lawsuit_dc&sid=95573419>

This, of course, is going nowhere at high speed. The only grounds for a
suit would be in Verizon's licensing of Bluetooth if the license were to
prohibit modification without permission of the Bluetooth capabilities
in order to preserve the "purity" of the Bluetooth trademark. How
consumers would have standing to sue is a mystery.

From the Bluetooth site: http://www.bluetooth.com/util/trademark.asp

"The Bluetooth brand inspires the possibilities of easy personal
wireless connectivity. As such, the Bluetooth SIG has developed and
published a specification requiring that products must be tested by a
strict qualification process to use the Bluetooth word mark and logos.
Companies may become licensees of the marks by becoming a member of the
Bluetooth SIG. Through the execution of membership agreements, including
the Bluetooth Trademark Licensing Agreement, companies are able to use
the Bluetooth marks on qualified products, packaging, marketing
materials, web pages, etc. Additional non-exclusive licensing agreements
are required for Bluetooth trademark usage for such things as
Pavillions, Tradeshow event names, and retailers of the technology."

Not a word or implication that consumers have rights from Bluetooth SIG.

Q
Anonymous
January 14, 2005 2:14:48 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular,alt.cellular,alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

I just looked on the VerizonWireless site and on the V710 page it
states, "And with Bluetooth® wireless technology, you can make
hands-free, eyes-free calls, and connect to your PC or PDA whenever and
wherever you want."

Since PCs and PDAs are not generally recognized as voice devices, it
certainly seems that VZW is touting data capabilities. They don't say
you can "connect your PC/PDA to the internet," they say you can
"connect [your phone] to your PC or PDA". Connect _from_ where? The
internet? Not likely.

So to me it sounds like the lawyers could make a case. And some
money... the phone owners will not get more than a coupon good for V710
accessories at a VZW store.

And most (all?) modems I've used are data devices.

tg.
ps -- why are we having this conversation in the Cingular newsgroup??
Related resources
Anonymous
January 14, 2005 2:14:49 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular,alt.cellular,alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

<glaabtom@netscape.net> wrote in message
news:1105665280.454644.233640@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>I just looked on the VerizonWireless site and on the V710 page it
states, "And with Bluetooth® wireless technology, you can make
hands-free, eyes-free calls, and connect to your PC or PDA whenever and
wherever you want."

>Since PCs and PDAs are not generally recognized as voice devices, it
certainly seems that VZW is touting data capabilities. They don't say
you can "connect your PC/PDA to the internet," they say you can
"connect [your phone] to your PC or PDA". Connect _from_ where? The
internet? Not likely.


I can connect to my computer with my non-BT phone. It's not needed to
connect and/or transfer data between the two.
Anonymous
January 14, 2005 2:14:50 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular,alt.cellular,alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

"Scott Stephenson" <scott.stephensonson@adelphia.net> wrote in message
news:4aGdnTR22pLFtnrcRVn-3A@adelphia.com...
>
> <glaabtom@netscape.net> wrote in message
> news:1105665280.454644.233640@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> >I just looked on the VerizonWireless site and on the V710 page it
> states, "And with Bluetooth® wireless technology, you can make
> hands-free, eyes-free calls, and connect to your PC or PDA whenever and
> wherever you want."
>
> >Since PCs and PDAs are not generally recognized as voice devices, it
> certainly seems that VZW is touting data capabilities. They don't say
> you can "connect your PC/PDA to the internet," they say you can
> "connect [your phone] to your PC or PDA". Connect _from_ where? The
> internet? Not likely.
>
>
> I can connect to my computer with my non-BT phone. It's not needed to
> connect and/or transfer data between the two.


But VZW advertises the ability to connect with Bluetooth then disables those
features in the phone.

--
SS
Anonymous
January 14, 2005 2:44:55 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular,alt.cellular,alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

In article <jzwick3-D2C03E.17143813012005@news1.west.earthlink.net>,
Jack Zwick <jzwick3@mindspring.com> wrote:

> One can not transfer files (such as pictures taken) with the bluetooth
> as configured in the Verizon model of the Motorola v710..
> Upset users are suing:
>
> <http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&ncid=1293&e...
> /tc_nm/telecoms_verizonwireless_lawsuit_dc&sid=95573419>


FOLLOWUP

I looked on the Verizon website to see if the plaintiffs could fairly
say they had been mislead, and it looks to me like they got a case;

Verizon's website says:

" Bluetooth is a low bandwidth, wireless networking technology designed
primarily to replace cables for communication between personal computing
and communication devices. It is intended to be used for both voice and
data communications "

No where is it specified that data transfer is not capable in the v710.
Anonymous
January 14, 2005 2:44:56 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular,alt.cellular,alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

"Jack Zwick" <jzwick3@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:jzwick3-9F2F82.17444713012005@news1.west.earthlink.net...
> In article <jzwick3-D2C03E.17143813012005@news1.west.earthlink.net>,
> Jack Zwick <jzwick3@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
> > One can not transfer files (such as pictures taken) with the bluetooth
> > as configured in the Verizon model of the Motorola v710..
> > Upset users are suing:
> >
> >
<http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&ncid=1293&e...
> > /tc_nm/telecoms_verizonwireless_lawsuit_dc&sid=95573419>
>
>
> FOLLOWUP
>
> I looked on the Verizon website to see if the plaintiffs could fairly
> say they had been mislead, and it looks to me like they got a case;
>
> Verizon's website says:
>
> " Bluetooth is a low bandwidth, wireless networking technology designed
> primarily to replace cables for communication between personal computing
> and communication devices. It is intended to be used for both voice and
> data communications "
>
> No where is it specified that data transfer is not capable in the v710.

FOLLOWUP TO THE TROLL'S FOLLOWUP

I looked on the Verizon website to see if the plaintiffs could fairly say
they had been mislead, and it looks to me like they've got no case;

Verizon's website says:


Profiles
a.. What are Bluetooth profiles?

A profile is a description of how to use a specification to implement a
given end-user function. The International Standards Organization (ISO)
first came up with the idea of profiles. In Bluetooth, there are several
profiles available and they are arranged in a hierarchical fashion, as
illustrated in this diagram. For example, in order to use the headset
profile, a device must also include the lower level profiles such as the
serial port and general access profiles.
b.. Which profiles does Verizon Wireless currently support?

Verizon Wireless currently supports three Bluetooth profiles:
· Headset - for connecting Bluetooth headsets

· Hands-Free - for connecting hands-free car kits

· Dial-up Networking (DUN) - to allow the handset to be used as a modem



No where is it specified that data transfer is possible with any Verizon
BT phone.
Anonymous
January 14, 2005 2:46:46 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular,alt.cellular,alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

In article <862dnRr0us8OmHrcRVn-tA@comcast.com>,
"Quaoar" <quaoar@tenthplanet.net> wrote:

> Jack Zwick wrote:
> > One can not transfer files (such as pictures taken) with the bluetooth
> > as configured in the Verizon model of the Motorola v710..
> > Upset users are suing:
> >
> > <http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&ncid=1293&e...
> > /tc_nm/telecoms_verizonwireless_lawsuit_dc&sid=95573419>
>
> This, of course, is going nowhere at high speed. The only grounds for a
> suit would be in Verizon's licensing of Bluetooth if the license were to
> prohibit modification without permission of the Bluetooth capabilities
> in order to preserve the "purity" of the Bluetooth trademark. How
> consumers would have standing to sue is a mystery.
>
> From the Bluetooth site: http://www.bluetooth.com/util/trademark.asp
>
> "The Bluetooth brand inspires the possibilities of easy personal
> wireless connectivity. As such, the Bluetooth SIG has developed and
> published a specification requiring that products must be tested by a
> strict qualification process to use the Bluetooth word mark and logos.
> Companies may become licensees of the marks by becoming a member of the
> Bluetooth SIG. Through the execution of membership agreements, including
> the Bluetooth Trademark Licensing Agreement, companies are able to use
> the Bluetooth marks on qualified products, packaging, marketing
> materials, web pages, etc. Additional non-exclusive licensing agreements
> are required for Bluetooth trademark usage for such things as
> Pavillions, Tradeshow event names, and retailers of the technology."
>
> Not a word or implication that consumers have rights from Bluetooth SIG.
>
> Q

Lead my followup posting. Verizon was clearly vague and misleading, and
only disabled those bluetooth functions that could be replaced with a
fee based substitute, but never said so.
Anonymous
January 14, 2005 4:51:20 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular,alt.cellular,alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

In article <1105665280.454644.233640@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
glaabtom@netscape.net wrote:

> I just looked on the VerizonWireless site and on the V710 page it
> states, "And with Bluetooth® wireless technology, you can make
> hands-free, eyes-free calls, and connect to your PC or PDA whenever and
> wherever you want."
>
> Since PCs and PDAs are not generally recognized as voice devices, it
> certainly seems that VZW is touting data capabilities. They don't say
> you can "connect your PC/PDA to the internet," they say you can
> "connect [your phone] to your PC or PDA". Connect from where? The
> internet? Not likely.
>
> So to me it sounds like the lawyers could make a case. And some
> money... the phone owners will not get more than a coupon good for V710
> accessories at a VZW store.
>
> And most (all?) modems I've used are data devices.
>
> tg.
> ps -- why are we having this conversation in the Cingular newsgroup??

The v710 is feature-wize quite similar to the v600.
Anonymous
January 14, 2005 10:02:50 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular,alt.cellular,alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <jzwick3-3ADF62.17463813012005@news1.west.earthlink.net> on Thu, 13 Jan
2005 23:46:46 GMT, Jack Zwick <jzwick3@mindspring.com> wrote:

>Lead my followup posting.

Lead?

>Verizon was clearly vague and misleading, and
>only disabled those bluetooth functions that could be replaced with a
>fee based substitute, but never said so.

Irrelevant.

--
Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular&gt;
Anonymous
January 14, 2005 10:02:57 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular,alt.cellular,alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <34ootcF49nudjU1@individual.net> on Thu, 13 Jan 2005 20:25:00 -0600,
"Shaolin Superfly" <shaolinsuperfly@yinyang.com> wrote:

>
>"Scott Stephenson" <scott.stephensonson@adelphia.net> wrote in message
>news:4aGdnTR22pLFtnrcRVn-3A@adelphia.com...
>>
>> <glaabtom@netscape.net> wrote in message
>> news:1105665280.454644.233640@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>> >I just looked on the VerizonWireless site and on the V710 page it
>> states, "And with Bluetooth® wireless technology, you can make
>> hands-free, eyes-free calls, and connect to your PC or PDA whenever and
>> wherever you want."
>>
>> >Since PCs and PDAs are not generally recognized as voice devices, it
>> certainly seems that VZW is touting data capabilities. They don't say
>> you can "connect your PC/PDA to the internet," they say you can
>> "connect [your phone] to your PC or PDA". Connect _from_ where? The
>> internet? Not likely.
>>
>>
>> I can connect to my computer with my non-BT phone. It's not needed to
>> connect and/or transfer data between the two.
>
>
>But VZW advertises the ability to connect with Bluetooth then disables those
>features in the phone.

If Bluetooth works (and it does) then it's not disabled (and it isn't).
Unless Verizon Wireless specifically promises features that aren't delivered,
then there is NO CASE.

--
Best regards,
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/&gt;

"Usenet is like a herd of performing elephants with diarrhea - massive,
difficult to redirect, awe inspiring, entertaining, and a source of mind
boggling amounts of excrement when you least expect it." --Gene Spafford
Anonymous
January 14, 2005 10:03:07 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular,alt.cellular,alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <jzwick3-9F2F82.17444713012005@news1.west.earthlink.net> on Thu, 13 Jan
2005 23:44:55 GMT, Jack Zwick <jzwick3@mindspring.com> wrote:

>In article <jzwick3-D2C03E.17143813012005@news1.west.earthlink.net>,
> Jack Zwick <jzwick3@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
>> One can not transfer files (such as pictures taken) with the bluetooth
>> as configured in the Verizon model of the Motorola v710..
>> Upset users are suing:
>>
>> <http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&ncid=1293&e...
>> /tc_nm/telecoms_verizonwireless_lawsuit_dc&sid=95573419>
>
>
>FOLLOWUP
>
>I looked on the Verizon website to see if the plaintiffs could fairly
>say they had been mislead, and it looks to me like they got a case;
>
>Verizon's website says:
>
>" Bluetooth is a low bandwidth, wireless networking technology designed
>primarily to replace cables for communication between personal computing
>and communication devices. It is intended to be used for both voice and
>data communications "
>
>No where is it specified that data transfer is not capable in the v710.

Verizon is under no obligation to do so.

--
Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular&gt;
January 14, 2005 11:47:48 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular,alt.cellular,alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

>>But VZW advertises the ability to connect with Bluetooth then disables those
>>features in the phone.

On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 07:02:57 GMT, John Navas wrote:
>
> If Bluetooth works (and it does) then it's not disabled (and it isn't).
> Unless Verizon Wireless specifically promises features that aren't delivered,
> then there is NO CASE.

Not necessarily ... Failure to disclose product limitations *may* fall
under an "Implied Warranty of Fitness for a Particular Purpose." ... I'd
say it's up to a judge to decide if there is a case. An "implied warranty
of fitness for a particular purpose" is a promise, implied by law, by a
merchant who knows that a buyer intends to use a product for a particular
purpose, and has reason to know that the buyer is relying on the merchant's
knowledge or expertise, that the product is suitable for the buyer's
particular purpose.
Anonymous
January 14, 2005 2:01:46 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular,alt.cellular,alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 08:47:48 -0500, Jim wrote
(in article <1nq7j9x442xiq.3rei94kcxk4b$.dlg@40tude.net>):

> Subject: Re: Verizon sued for crippling Bluetooth in Motorola v710
> From: Jim <jim@none.no>
> Date: Today 8:47 AM
> Newsgroups: alt.cellular.cingular, alt.cellular, alt.cellular.verizon
>
>
>>> But VZW advertises the ability to connect with Bluetooth then disables
>>> those
>>> features in the phone.
>
> On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 07:02:57 GMT, John Navas wrote:
>>
>> If Bluetooth works (and it does) then it's not disabled (and it isn't).
>> Unless Verizon Wireless specifically promises features that aren't
>> delivered,
>> then there is NO CASE.
>
> Not necessarily ... Failure to disclose product limitations *may* fall
> under an "Implied Warranty of Fitness for a Particular Purpose." ... I'd
> say it's up to a judge to decide if there is a case. An "implied warranty
> of fitness for a particular purpose" is a promise, implied by law, by a
> merchant who knows that a buyer intends to use a product for a particular
> purpose, and has reason to know that the buyer is relying on the merchant's
> knowledge or expertise, that the product is suitable for the buyer's
> particular purpose.

I would have otherwise assumed that I could do file transfers between phone &
computer. It's been a natural part of bluetooth since ... well, since I knew
about bluetooth anyway. I would imagine that other folks would have made the
same assumption.

(I know, I know ... never assume).
Anonymous
January 14, 2005 3:10:49 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular,alt.cellular,alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

"Quaoar" <quaoar@tenthplanet.net> wrote in message
news:862dnRr0us8OmHrcRVn-tA@comcast.com...
---snip---snip---snip---
> This, of course, is going nowhere at high speed
---snip---snip---snip---

Probable true, but think of the bad press and the impression it leaves in
the mind of shoppers.
Anonymous
January 14, 2005 6:42:52 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular,alt.cellular,alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

In article <1nq7j9x442xiq.3rei94kcxk4b$.dlg@40tude.net>,
Jim <jim@none.no> wrote:

>
> >>But VZW advertises the ability to connect with Bluetooth then disables
> >>those
> >>features in the phone.
>
> On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 07:02:57 GMT, John Navas wrote:
> >
> > If Bluetooth works (and it does) then it's not disabled (and it isn't).
> > Unless Verizon Wireless specifically promises features that aren't
> > delivered,
> > then there is NO CASE.
>
> Not necessarily ... Failure to disclose product limitations *may* fall
> under an "Implied Warranty of Fitness for a Particular Purpose." ... I'd
> say it's up to a judge to decide if there is a case. An "implied warranty
> of fitness for a particular purpose" is a promise, implied by law, by a
> merchant who knows that a buyer intends to use a product for a particular
> purpose, and has reason to know that the buyer is relying on the merchant's
> knowledge or expertise, that the product is suitable for the buyer's
> particular purpose.

And since Verizon discusses how Bluetooth is used for data transfer to a
PC, but then disables that feature in the V710, They very clearly have
misled their customers.
Anonymous
January 14, 2005 7:11:52 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular,alt.cellular,alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 15:10:49 -0500, Joe Kaffe wrote
(in article <HHVFd.650$hu.165@fed1read01>):

> Probable true, but think of the bad press and the impression it leaves in
> the mind of shoppers.

BINGO!
Anonymous
January 14, 2005 8:13:48 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular,alt.cellular,alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <1nq7j9x442xiq.3rei94kcxk4b$.dlg@40tude.net> on Fri, 14 Jan 2005 08:47:48
-0500, Jim <jim@none.no> wrote:

>>>But VZW advertises the ability to connect with Bluetooth then disables those
>>>features in the phone.
>
>On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 07:02:57 GMT, John Navas wrote:
>>
>> If Bluetooth works (and it does) then it's not disabled (and it isn't).
>> Unless Verizon Wireless specifically promises features that aren't delivered,
>> then there is NO CASE.
>
>Not necessarily ... Failure to disclose product limitations *may* fall
>under an "Implied Warranty of Fitness for a Particular Purpose." ... I'd
>say it's up to a judge to decide if there is a case. ...

Since most Bluetooth devices don't support all profiles and features, there
can't be implied functionality, and thus there is NO CASE.

--
Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular&gt;
January 14, 2005 8:13:49 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular,alt.cellular,alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 17:13:48 GMT, John Navas wrote:

> [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

>>On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 07:02:57 GMT, John Navas wrote:
>>>
>>> If Bluetooth works (and it does) then it's not disabled (and it isn't).
>>> Unless Verizon Wireless specifically promises features that aren't delivered,
>>> then there is NO CASE.
>>
>>Not necessarily ... Failure to disclose product limitations *may* fall
>>under an "Implied Warranty of Fitness for a Particular Purpose." ... I'd
>>say it's up to a judge to decide if there is a case. ...
>
> Since most Bluetooth devices don't support all profiles and features, there
> can't be implied functionality, and thus there is NO CASE.

The phone marketing descriptions do imply functionality ... thus, let a
JUDGE decide what are reasonable consumer expections.
Anonymous
January 14, 2005 8:15:25 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular,alt.cellular,alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <jzwick3-838616.09411814012005@news1.west.earthlink.net> on Fri, 14 Jan
2005 15:42:52 GMT, Jack "FUDMEISTER" Zwick <jzwick3@mindspring.com> wrote:

>In article <1nq7j9x442xiq.3rei94kcxk4b$.dlg@40tude.net>,
> Jim <jim@none.no> wrote:
>
>>
>> >>But VZW advertises the ability to connect with Bluetooth then disables
>> >>those
>> >>features in the phone.
>>
>> On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 07:02:57 GMT, John Navas wrote:
>> >
>> > If Bluetooth works (and it does) then it's not disabled (and it isn't).
>> > Unless Verizon Wireless specifically promises features that aren't
>> > delivered,
>> > then there is NO CASE.
>>
>> Not necessarily ... Failure to disclose product limitations *may* fall
>> under an "Implied Warranty of Fitness for a Particular Purpose." ... I'd
>> say it's up to a judge to decide if there is a case. An "implied warranty
>> of fitness for a particular purpose" is a promise, implied by law, by a
>> merchant who knows that a buyer intends to use a product for a particular
>> purpose, and has reason to know that the buyer is relying on the merchant's
>> knowledge or expertise, that the product is suitable for the buyer's
>> particular purpose.
>
>And since Verizon discusses how Bluetooth is used for data transfer to a
>PC, but then disables that feature in the V710, They very clearly have
>misled their customers.

Nonsense, since nowhere in the description of the V710 is data transfer
promised. Headset use is sufficient to meet both the letter and the spirit of
the law.

--
Best regards,
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/&gt;

"Usenet is like a herd of performing elephants with diarrhea - massive,
difficult to redirect, awe inspiring, entertaining, and a source of mind
boggling amounts of excrement when you least expect it." --Gene Spafford
Anonymous
January 14, 2005 8:15:26 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular,alt.cellular,alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

"John Navas" <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote in message
news:N6TFd.1895$m31.22315@typhoon.sonic.net...
> [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
>
> In <jzwick3-838616.09411814012005@news1.west.earthlink.net> on Fri, 14 Jan
> 2005 15:42:52 GMT, Jack "FUDMEISTER" Zwick <jzwick3@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
> >In article <1nq7j9x442xiq.3rei94kcxk4b$.dlg@40tude.net>,
> > Jim <jim@none.no> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> >>But VZW advertises the ability to connect with Bluetooth then
disables
> >> >>those
> >> >>features in the phone.
> >>
> >> On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 07:02:57 GMT, John Navas wrote:
> >> >
> >> > If Bluetooth works (and it does) then it's not disabled (and it
isn't).
> >> > Unless Verizon Wireless specifically promises features that aren't
> >> > delivered,
> >> > then there is NO CASE.
> >>
> >> Not necessarily ... Failure to disclose product limitations *may* fall
> >> under an "Implied Warranty of Fitness for a Particular Purpose." ...
I'd
> >> say it's up to a judge to decide if there is a case. An "implied
warranty
> >> of fitness for a particular purpose" is a promise, implied by law, by a
> >> merchant who knows that a buyer intends to use a product for a
particular
> >> purpose, and has reason to know that the buyer is relying on the
merchant's
> >> knowledge or expertise, that the product is suitable for the buyer's
> >> particular purpose.
> >
> >And since Verizon discusses how Bluetooth is used for data transfer to a
> >PC, but then disables that feature in the V710, They very clearly have
> >misled their customers.
>
> Nonsense, since nowhere in the description of the V710 is data transfer
> promised. Headset use is sufficient to meet both the letter and the
spirit of
> the law.


You are one stupid bitch for such a "know-it-all"

--
SS
Anonymous
January 14, 2005 8:16:15 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular,alt.cellular,alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <0001HW.BE0D571A001F0BC4F02845B0@nntp.charter.net> on Fri, 14 Jan 2005
11:01:46 -0500, SinghaLvr <singhalvr@charter.net> wrote:

>I would have otherwise assumed that I could do file transfers between phone &
>computer. It's been a natural part of bluetooth since ... well, since I knew
>about bluetooth anyway. ...

Really? Bluetooth headsets can do data transfer?

--
Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular&gt;
Anonymous
January 14, 2005 8:16:16 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular,alt.cellular,alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 12:16:15 -0500, John Navas wrote
(in article <z7TFd.1896$m31.22073@typhoon.sonic.net>):

> Subject: Re: Verizon sued for crippling Bluetooth in Motorola v710
> From: John Navas <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com>
> Date: Today 12:16 PM
> Newsgroups: alt.cellular.cingular, alt.cellular, alt.cellular.verizon
>
> [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
>
> In <0001HW.BE0D571A001F0BC4F02845B0@nntp.charter.net> on Fri, 14 Jan 2005
> 11:01:46 -0500, SinghaLvr <singhalvr@charter.net> wrote:
>
>> I would have otherwise assumed that I could do file transfers between phone
>> &
>> computer. It's been a natural part of bluetooth since ... well, since I
>> knew
>> about bluetooth anyway. ...
>
> Really? Bluetooth headsets can do data transfer?

Think man ... computing / data devices ....
Anonymous
January 14, 2005 8:16:16 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular,alt.cellular,alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

John Navas wrote:

> Really? Bluetooth headsets can do data transfer?

No, but Bluetooth-equipped PDAs and non-crippled Bluetooth-equipped phones
normally can.

The fact that Bluetooth-equipped headsets don't is a red herring.

--
JustThe.net - Apple Valley, CA - http://JustThe.net/ - 888.480.4NET (4638)
Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / sjsobol@JustThe.net / PGP: 0xE3AE35ED

"In case anyone was wondering, that big glowing globe above the Victor
Valley is the sun." -Victorville _Daily Press_ on the unusually large
amount of rain the Southland has gotten this winter (January 12th, 2005)
Anonymous
January 14, 2005 10:10:38 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular,alt.cellular,alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <0001HW.BE0D76D100267A92F05095B0@nntp.charter.net> on Fri, 14 Jan 2005
13:17:05 -0500, nospam <nospam@nospam.net> wrote:

>On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 12:16:15 -0500, John Navas wrote
>(in article <z7TFd.1896$m31.22073@typhoon.sonic.net>):
>
>> Subject: Re: Verizon sued for crippling Bluetooth in Motorola v710
>> From: John Navas <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com>
>> Date: Today 12:16 PM
>> Newsgroups: alt.cellular.cingular, alt.cellular, alt.cellular.verizon
>>
>> In <0001HW.BE0D571A001F0BC4F02845B0@nntp.charter.net> on Fri, 14 Jan 2005
>> 11:01:46 -0500, SinghaLvr <singhalvr@charter.net> wrote:
>>
>>> I would have otherwise assumed that I could do file transfers between phone
>>> &
>>> computer. It's been a natural part of bluetooth since ... well, since I
>>> knew
>>> about bluetooth anyway. ...
>>
>> Really? Bluetooth headsets can do data transfer?
>
>Think man ... computing / data devices ....

Think man ... a phone is not "computing / data devices" ....

--
Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular&gt;
Anonymous
January 14, 2005 10:10:39 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular,alt.cellular,alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 14:10:38 -0500, John Navas wrote
(in article <OOUFd.1912$m31.22704@typhoon.sonic.net>):

> Subject: Re: Verizon sued for crippling Bluetooth in Motorola v710
> From: John Navas <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com>
> Date: Today 2:10 PM
> Newsgroups: alt.cellular.cingular, alt.cellular, alt.cellular.verizon
>
> [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
>
> In <0001HW.BE0D76D100267A92F05095B0@nntp.charter.net> on Fri, 14 Jan 2005
> 13:17:05 -0500, nospam <nospam@nospam.net> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 12:16:15 -0500, John Navas wrote
>> (in article <z7TFd.1896$m31.22073@typhoon.sonic.net>):
>>
>>> Subject: Re: Verizon sued for crippling Bluetooth in Motorola v710
>>> From: John Navas <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com>
>>> Date: Today 12:16 PM
>>> Newsgroups: alt.cellular.cingular, alt.cellular, alt.cellular.verizon
>>>
>>> In <0001HW.BE0D571A001F0BC4F02845B0@nntp.charter.net> on Fri, 14 Jan 2005
>>> 11:01:46 -0500, SinghaLvr <singhalvr@charter.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I would have otherwise assumed that I could do file transfers between
>>>> phone
>>>> &
>>>> computer. It's been a natural part of bluetooth since ... well, since I
>>>> knew
>>>> about bluetooth anyway. ...
>>>
>>> Really? Bluetooth headsets can do data transfer?
>>
>> Think man ... computing / data devices ....
>
> Think man ... a phone is not "computing / data devices" ....

Such a 1950's way of thinking ..... :-)
Anonymous
January 14, 2005 10:32:55 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular,alt.cellular,alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <cs946i$k2s$1@ratbert.glorb.com> on Fri, 14 Jan 2005 10:50:14 -0800, Steve
Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net> wrote:

>John Navas wrote:
>
>> Really? Bluetooth headsets can do data transfer?
>
>No, but Bluetooth-equipped PDAs and non-crippled Bluetooth-equipped phones
>normally can.
>
>The fact that Bluetooth-equipped headsets don't is a red herring.

I disagree. Bluetooth support varies from device to device. If you want a
specific function, then you have an obligation to see if that function is
supported. It's not the responsibility of the seller to anticipate your
expectations. Windows XP SP2 doesn't support the Bluetooth headset profile.
Is Microsoft liable? :)  Your standard is unrealistic and unworkable.

--
Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular&gt;
Anonymous
January 14, 2005 10:32:56 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular,alt.cellular,alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

John Navas wrote:

>>The fact that Bluetooth-equipped headsets don't is a red herring.
>
> I disagree. Bluetooth support varies from device to device. If you want a
> specific function, then you have an obligation to see if that function is
> supported. It's not the responsibility of the seller to anticipate your
> expectations. Windows XP SP2 doesn't support the Bluetooth headset profile.
> Is Microsoft liable? :)  Your standard is unrealistic and unworkable.

I have to say, it's much more often that I agree with you and disagree with
"Jack Zwick" than the other way around, but this time I agree with him.

Microsoft isn't advertising a specific use of BT. It would seem that Verizon
is, and is not providing that particular functionality in their phones.

It's *really* that simple.

--
JustThe.net - Apple Valley, CA - http://JustThe.net/ - 888.480.4NET (4638)
Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / sjsobol@JustThe.net / PGP: 0xE3AE35ED

"In case anyone was wondering, that big glowing globe above the Victor
Valley is the sun." -Victorville _Daily Press_ on the unusually large
amount of rain the Southland has gotten this winter (January 12th, 2005)
Anonymous
January 14, 2005 11:43:59 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular,alt.cellular,alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

In article <H7VFd.1922$m31.22438@typhoon.sonic.net>,
John Navas <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote:

> [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
>
> In <cs946i$k2s$1@ratbert.glorb.com> on Fri, 14 Jan 2005 10:50:14 -0800, Steve
> Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net> wrote:
>
> >John Navas wrote:
> >
> >> Really? Bluetooth headsets can do data transfer?
> >
> >No, but Bluetooth-equipped PDAs and non-crippled Bluetooth-equipped phones
> >normally can.
> >
> >The fact that Bluetooth-equipped headsets don't is a red herring.
>
> I disagree. Bluetooth support varies from device to device. If you want a
> specific function, then you have an obligation to see if that function is
> supported. It's not the responsibility of the seller to anticipate your
> expectations. Windows XP SP2 doesn't support the Bluetooth headset profile.
> Is Microsoft liable? :)  Your standard is unrealistic and unworkable.

You are ignoring what Verizon has posted on their website re: Bluetooth.

"V710: Connectivity via Bluetooth"
Anonymous
January 14, 2005 11:45:45 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular,alt.cellular,alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

In article <OOUFd.1912$m31.22704@typhoon.sonic.net>,
John Navas <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote:

> [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
>
> In <0001HW.BE0D76D100267A92F05095B0@nntp.charter.net> on Fri, 14 Jan 2005
> 13:17:05 -0500, nospam <nospam@nospam.net> wrote:
>
> >On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 12:16:15 -0500, John Navas wrote
> >(in article <z7TFd.1896$m31.22073@typhoon.sonic.net>):
> >
> >> Subject: Re: Verizon sued for crippling Bluetooth in Motorola v710
> >> From: John Navas <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com>
> >> Date: Today 12:16 PM
> >> Newsgroups: alt.cellular.cingular, alt.cellular, alt.cellular.verizon
> >>
> >> In <0001HW.BE0D571A001F0BC4F02845B0@nntp.charter.net> on Fri, 14 Jan 2005
> >> 11:01:46 -0500, SinghaLvr <singhalvr@charter.net> wrote:
> >>
> >>> I would have otherwise assumed that I could do file transfers between
> >>> phone
> >>> &
> >>> computer. It's been a natural part of bluetooth since ... well, since I
> >>> knew
> >>> about bluetooth anyway. ...
> >>
> >> Really? Bluetooth headsets can do data transfer?
> >
> >Think man ... computing / data devices ....
>
> Think man ... a phone is not "computing / data devices" ....
>

Then why does Verizon say the following on their website:

"Bluetooth is a low bandwidth, wireless networking technology designed
primarily to replace cables for communication between personal computing
and communication devices. It is intended to be used for both voice and
data communications. "

<http://www.verizonwireless.com/b2c/dispatcher?action=DI...
OPIC&topicID=190#1245>
January 15, 2005 12:39:11 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular,alt.cellular,alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

All I can do about this one is laugh my ass of. Of course, since Verizon
Wireless will have to pay some legal fees for this to some degree, this only
means our prices may rise and we'll never get any competitive promotions at
all. Hey, I'm very close to talking my better half to switch to Cingular. I
forced her to use my friends phone for a few days and she's in love with it.
Then she asks, does Verizon have a phone or phones like this? Then again a
big laugh. Of course not dear...that's Verizon.

Soon...maybe soon I'll be rid of this rotten organization. Even though all
the cellular companies are typical and can't provide any customer service
whatsoever because of the incompetent help at least they have better
promotions and contracts. Man, you really have to love roll over minutes.
Actually, it's minutes that are yours anyway, because you paid for them.

"Jack Zwick" <jzwick3@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:jzwick3-D2C03E.17143813012005@news1.west.earthlink.net...
> One can not transfer files (such as pictures taken) with the bluetooth
> as configured in the Verizon model of the Motorola v710..
> Upset users are suing:
>
> <http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&ncid=1293&e...
> /tc_nm/telecoms_verizonwireless_lawsuit_dc&sid=95573419>
January 15, 2005 12:42:15 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular,alt.cellular,alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

This is why I'm laughing. It made the news, papers and does leave a bitter
taste in the mouth. Maybe a lot of people will start to not trust them now
because of all this press.

"Joe Kaffe" <kaffejoe@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:HHVFd.650$hu.165@fed1read01...
>
> "Quaoar" <quaoar@tenthplanet.net> wrote in message
> news:862dnRr0us8OmHrcRVn-tA@comcast.com...
> ---snip---snip---snip---
> > This, of course, is going nowhere at high speed
> ---snip---snip---snip---
>
> Probable true, but think of the bad press and the impression it leaves in
> the mind of shoppers.
>
>
January 15, 2005 12:50:52 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular,alt.cellular,alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

How do you think the data is being sent to the headset? Telepathy?

"John Navas" <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote in message
news:z7TFd.1896$m31.22073@typhoon.sonic.net...
> [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
>
> In <0001HW.BE0D571A001F0BC4F02845B0@nntp.charter.net> on Fri, 14 Jan 2005
> 11:01:46 -0500, SinghaLvr <singhalvr@charter.net> wrote:
>
> >I would have otherwise assumed that I could do file transfers between
phone &
> >computer. It's been a natural part of bluetooth since ... well, since I
knew
> >about bluetooth anyway. ...
>
> Really? Bluetooth headsets can do data transfer?
>
> --
> Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
> John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular&gt;
Anonymous
January 15, 2005 3:30:13 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular,alt.cellular,alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

In article <34qurfF4ed9t7U1@individual.net>,
"Shaolin Superfly" <shaolinsuperfly@yinyang.com> wrote:

> "John Navas" <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote in message
> news:N6TFd.1895$m31.22315@typhoon.sonic.net...
> > [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
> >
> > In <jzwick3-838616.09411814012005@news1.west.earthlink.net> on Fri, 14 Jan
> > 2005 15:42:52 GMT, Jack "FUDMEISTER" Zwick <jzwick3@mindspring.com> wrote:

You can tell when Navas is unsure of himself. He childishly needs to
stick in an insult.



> >
> > >In article <1nq7j9x442xiq.3rei94kcxk4b$.dlg@40tude.net>,
> > > Jim <jim@none.no> wrote:
> > >
> > >>
> > >> >>But VZW advertises the ability to connect with Bluetooth then
> disables
> > >> >>those
> > >> >>features in the phone.
> > >>
> > >> On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 07:02:57 GMT, John Navas wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> > If Bluetooth works (and it does) then it's not disabled (and it
> isn't).
> > >> > Unless Verizon Wireless specifically promises features that aren't
> > >> > delivered,
> > >> > then there is NO CASE.
> > >>
> > >> Not necessarily ... Failure to disclose product limitations *may* fall
> > >> under an "Implied Warranty of Fitness for a Particular Purpose." ...
> I'd
> > >> say it's up to a judge to decide if there is a case. An "implied
> warranty
> > >> of fitness for a particular purpose" is a promise, implied by law, by a
> > >> merchant who knows that a buyer intends to use a product for a
> particular
> > >> purpose, and has reason to know that the buyer is relying on the
> merchant's
> > >> knowledge or expertise, that the product is suitable for the buyer's
> > >> particular purpose.
> > >
> > >And since Verizon discusses how Bluetooth is used for data transfer to a
> > >PC, but then disables that feature in the V710, They very clearly have
> > >misled their customers.
> >
> > Nonsense, since nowhere in the description of the V710 is data transfer
> > promised. Headset use is sufficient to meet both the letter and the
> spirit of
> > the law.
>
>
> You are one stupid bitch for such a "know-it-all"


And Navas is wrong, you just have to click through to "Bluetooth", and
there is such an implied promise.

>
> --
> SS
Anonymous
January 15, 2005 4:52:39 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular,alt.cellular,alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

"Jack Zwick" <jzwick3@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:jzwick3-D2C03E.17143813012005@news1.west.earthlink.net...
> One can not transfer files (such as pictures taken) with the bluetooth
> as configured in the Verizon model of the Motorola v710..
> Upset users are suing:

The only thing that surprises me is why it took so long.

It, to me, appears as a self evident requirement for that device.

A bluetooth connection in a camera moves pictures and video.
A bluetooth connection in a data watch moves files and information.
A bluetooth connection in a video camera moves video/audio files.
A bluetooth connection in a PDA moves raw data that contain address books
and such..

A phone without internal data storage should contain a bluetooth connection
which allows it to move audio (handset) and raw data. (DUN)
Which they do.

A phone with internal data storage and a video camera should have a
bluetooth
Connection that supports movement of audio (handset), raw data. (DUN),
Picture/video files (from camera), and data files (from internal storage).
The last two from the generic object exchange profile.
The profile which Motorola built into the phone,
because it's need was self evident,
But verizon required it's disabling.
And then verizon didn't explicitly state to the customers that
they had disabled a capability that is generally assumed to be required.

All the above devices are limited to what the manufacturer designed into the
phone.
Because the programming that controls the bluetooth device can not be change
by the user.
Even though the bluetooth transceiver could support any type of operation
you could think of.

And because of that, it is a requirement of the seller to anticipate
any requirements, or functions in which the need of their presence is self
evident.
For, they do not give the option to the consumer to change what they forgot.

"John Navas" <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote in message
news:H7VFd.1922$m31.22438@typhoon.sonic.net...
> [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
>
> Bluetooth support varies from device to device. If you want a
> specific function, then you have an obligation to see if that function is
> supported. It's not the responsibility of the seller to anticipate your
> expectations. Windows XP SP2 doesn't support the Bluetooth headset
> profile.
> Is Microsoft liable? :)  Your standard is unrealistic and unworkable.
>

To try to compare them to a computer's blue tooth connectivity is a fallacy
Microsoft, or Linux... no difference.
I can complain about many thing that Microsoft does,
but that is, beyond a doubt, not one of them.
And to do so is an insult, even to them. :-P
And it is something I will defend them on, without a doubt. :-)

Windows is one of the most flexible, modular, upgradeable, and open
operating systems you can get.
(and still retain licensed control over it)
The only one that beats them out of the openness of windows, is Linux.
They do not have to anticipate what the user wants,
for they give the user full capability to change anything as they desire.

As with all the prestated devices, the bluetooth unit in a computer or palm
pc is capable
of communicating with ANY other blue tooth device, or emulating any other
device.
The only thing that limits it is the firmware in the pre stated devices.
But computers of the palm pc or full computer/laptop variety have no such
limitation
They can be user programmed to support any communications profile, or even
custom profiles..
And with the openness and flexibility of windows, I can make it do anything
i want!

A bluetooth connection in a palm pc or computer can move
video audio, raw data or files of any type.
It can use a bluetooth headset following the generic headset profile.
It can emulate a generic headset for any other bluetooth device.

You can make a full size desk top computer emulate a bluetooth data watch.
To the palm pc, your just moving your files to your data watch, even though
it's actually communicating to your desk top pc.

You can even make your computer/palm pc/laptop emulate a car's hands free
system.
Your cell phone will think you are in the car talking, when it's actually
connecting through
the desktop pc, and the audio is running through the computer's sound
system.

You can even make your laptop emulate a cell phone.
You can even make custom drivers and create non standard bluetooth profiles.

The limit only restricted by the drivers you want to install and the
programs you want to use.
I already know of virtual bluetooth handset programs to that you can put on
your computer.
And various other types of programs to do wacky stuff with blue tooth
connections on PC's.
It will be only time before people make programs to do anything you could
think of with
A blue tooth transceiver on a pc/laptop/palm pc

With the openness of windows, even me, myself,
can write a driver or program to make the bluetooth transceiver do anything.
Microsoft even provides development tools free for the taking, to help
anyone do so.

Back to the cellular phone............
You could also do anything imaginable with the blue tooth transceiver in a
710 phone.
All you have to do is change the firmware with another version
that will use the bluetooth transceiver appropriately.

And if there isn't any firmware that supports the capabilities,
then you will have to make your own firm ware.

As I stated, that is easy with PC's, but it's a bit harder with cell phones,
Verizon is a lot more secretive than Microsoft.
But it is probably what you will need to do.
Or you can sue company that sold it to you, and force them to change it.
Which appears to be what the other people are doing.

If the cell phone operating system was as open as windows,
Five days after the phone come out,
you would have people offering the driver to update the phone,
and enable that capability free of charge.
Anonymous
January 15, 2005 4:59:45 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular,alt.cellular,alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

In article <HH_Fd.19247$w62.5469@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>,
"N9WOS" <n9wos@nobugatt.net> wrote:

> As I stated, that is easy with PC's, but it's a bit harder with cell phones,
> Verizon is a lot more secretive than Microsoft.
> But it is probably what you will need to do.
> Or you can sue company that sold it to you, and force them to change it.
> Which appears to be what the other people are doing.

Or Verizon should clearly state what is and isnt capable with its
Bluetooth implementation.
Anonymous
January 15, 2005 8:11:38 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular,alt.cellular,alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <jzwick3-E7F213.14453814012005@news1.west.earthlink.net> on Fri, 14 Jan
2005 20:45:45 GMT, Jack "FUDMEISTER" Zwick <jzwick3@mindspring.com> wrote:

>Then why does Verizon say the following on their website:
>
>"Bluetooth is a low bandwidth, wireless networking technology designed
>primarily to replace cables for communication between personal computing
>and communication devices. It is intended to be used for both voice and
>data communications. "

Because it's true. But that proves nothing. What matters is what is promised
for the phone.

--
Best regards,
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/&gt;

"A little learning is a dangerous thing." [Alexander Pope]
"It is better to sit in silence and appear ignorant,
than to open your mouth and remove all doubt." [Mark Twain]
Anonymous
January 15, 2005 8:19:48 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular,alt.cellular,alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <jzwick3-891F72.14435114012005@news1.west.earthlink.net> on Fri, 14 Jan
2005 20:43:59 GMT, Jack Zwick <jzwick3@mindspring.com> wrote:

>In article <H7VFd.1922$m31.22438@typhoon.sonic.net>,
> John Navas <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote:

>> I disagree. Bluetooth support varies from device to device. If you want a
>> specific function, then you have an obligation to see if that function is
>> supported. It's not the responsibility of the seller to anticipate your
>> expectations. Windows XP SP2 doesn't support the Bluetooth headset profile.
>> Is Microsoft liable? :)  Your standard is unrealistic and unworkable.
>
>You are ignoring what Verizon has posted on their website re: Bluetooth.
>
>"V710: Connectivity via Bluetooth"

Can you not connect a headset to the V710 by Bluetooth (i.e., K6: Headset
Profile)?

There are actually 13 different Profiles in Bluetooth 1.1 -- which ones are
you demanding that Verizon support for the V710 (and by extension every other
Bluetooth phone for every other carrier), and on what basis? Do you even know
what a Profile is? ;-)

I have no idea what Verizon has in mind, but I suspect it has more to do with
the very real risks of "bluesnarfing" and "bluejacking" than with curtailing
user choice. Regardless, if you don't like the limitations, then buy
something else! No one is being forced to buy the V710.

--
Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular&gt;
Anonymous
January 15, 2005 8:21:23 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular,alt.cellular,alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <cs9bji$m3m$1@ratbert.glorb.com> on Fri, 14 Jan 2005 12:56:38 -0800, Steve
Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net> wrote:

>John Navas wrote:
>
>>>The fact that Bluetooth-equipped headsets don't is a red herring.
>>
>> I disagree. Bluetooth support varies from device to device. If you want a
>> specific function, then you have an obligation to see if that function is
>> supported. It's not the responsibility of the seller to anticipate your
>> expectations. Windows XP SP2 doesn't support the Bluetooth headset profile.
>> Is Microsoft liable? :)  Your standard is unrealistic and unworkable.
>
>I have to say, it's much more often that I agree with you and disagree with
>"Jack Zwick" than the other way around, but this time I agree with him.
>
>Microsoft isn't advertising a specific use of BT. It would seem that Verizon
>is, and is not providing that particular functionality in their phones.
>
>It's *really* that simple.

I don't think so, so we'll just have to agree to disagree. Customization of
phones by carriers is a well-established practice, and if you don't like the
customization, don't buy the phone -- it's *really* that simple, and is how
the market works.

--
Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular&gt;
Anonymous
January 15, 2005 8:22:46 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular,alt.cellular,alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

It's being sent by K6: Headset Profile. Bluetooth 1.1 has 13 different
Profiles, and most devices only support a small subset of those Profiles.

In <10uh18db6c77865@corp.supernews.com> on Fri, 14 Jan 2005 21:50:52 -0500,
<xman@thedripper.com> wrote:

>How do you think the data is being sent to the headset? Telepathy?
>
>"John Navas" <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote in message
>news:z7TFd.1896$m31.22073@typhoon.sonic.net...
>>
>> In <0001HW.BE0D571A001F0BC4F02845B0@nntp.charter.net> on Fri, 14 Jan 2005
>> 11:01:46 -0500, SinghaLvr <singhalvr@charter.net> wrote:
>>
>> >I would have otherwise assumed that I could do file transfers between
>phone &
>> >computer. It's been a natural part of bluetooth since ... well, since I
>knew
>> >about bluetooth anyway. ...
>>
>> Really? Bluetooth headsets can do data transfer?

--
Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular&gt;
Anonymous
January 15, 2005 8:24:23 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular,alt.cellular,alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <5omk53mbl7m6.5w9kwseahyjq.dlg@40tude.net> on Fri, 14 Jan 2005 15:32:36
-0500, Jim <jim@none.no> wrote:

>On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 17:13:48 GMT, John Navas wrote:
>
>>>On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 07:02:57 GMT, John Navas wrote:
>>>>
>>>> If Bluetooth works (and it does) then it's not disabled (and it isn't).
>>>> Unless Verizon Wireless specifically promises features that aren't delivered,
>>>> then there is NO CASE.
>>>
>>>Not necessarily ... Failure to disclose product limitations *may* fall
>>>under an "Implied Warranty of Fitness for a Particular Purpose." ... I'd
>>>say it's up to a judge to decide if there is a case. ...
>>
>> Since most Bluetooth devices don't support all profiles and features, there
>> can't be implied functionality, and thus there is NO CASE.
>
>The phone marketing descriptions do imply functionality ...

Perhaps I missed that, so please cite the exact language in the phone
marketing description (with citation) that you think implies data transfer
functionality.

--
Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular&gt;
Anonymous
January 15, 2005 8:26:18 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular,alt.cellular,alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <HH_Fd.19247$w62.5469@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net> on Sat, 15 Jan
2005 01:52:39 GMT, "N9WOS" <n9wos@nobugatt.net> wrote:

>Verizon is a lot more secretive than Microsoft.

Say what?! LOL

--
Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular&gt;
Anonymous
January 15, 2005 8:26:19 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular,alt.cellular,alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

On Sat, 15 Jan 2005 00:26:18 -0500, John Navas wrote
(in article <_P1Gd.2030$m31.23836@typhoon.sonic.net>):

>
>> Verizon is a lot more secretive than Microsoft.
>
> Say what?! LOL

We know what Microsoft is planning on releasing in 2007.
We don't know what Verizon is planning on releasing in 9 months.
Anonymous
January 15, 2005 8:28:23 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular,alt.cellular,alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <jzwick3-F32F7F.19593914012005@news1.west.earthlink.net> on Sat, 15 Jan
2005 01:59:45 GMT, Jack Zwick <jzwick3@mindspring.com> wrote:

>In article <HH_Fd.19247$w62.5469@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>,
> "N9WOS" <n9wos@nobugatt.net> wrote:
>
>> As I stated, that is easy with PC's, but it's a bit harder with cell phones,
>> Verizon is a lot more secretive than Microsoft.
>> But it is probably what you will need to do.
>> Or you can sue company that sold it to you, and force them to change it.
>> Which appears to be what the other people are doing.
>
>Or Verizon should clearly state what is and isnt capable with its
>Bluetooth implementation.

It only needs to state what is capable. AFAIK, it has done that. No?
It doesn't need to say a long list of things like, "won't scramble eggs."

--
Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular&gt;
Anonymous
January 15, 2005 10:28:30 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular,alt.cellular,alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <0001HW.BE0E2DE90051644AF04075B0@nntp.charter.net> on Sat, 15 Jan 2005
02:18:17 -0500, SinghaLvr <singhalvr@charter.net> wrote:

>On Sat, 15 Jan 2005 00:26:18 -0500, John Navas wrote
>(in article <_P1Gd.2030$m31.23836@typhoon.sonic.net>):
>
>>> Verizon is a lot more secretive than Microsoft.
>>
>> Say what?! LOL
>
>We know what Microsoft is planning on releasing in 2007.

We do?! LOL We know what Microsoft says its planning on releasing in 2007,
but we know from experience that almost certainly won't happen.

>We don't know what Verizon is planning on releasing in 9 months.

Really? Read SEC filings and analyst briefings. I think it's at least as
informative as Microsoft.

--
Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular&gt;
Anonymous
January 15, 2005 11:36:06 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular,alt.cellular,alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

John Navas <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote in
news:eC1Gd.2025$m31.23831@typhoon.sonic.net:

> [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
>
> In <jzwick3-E7F213.14453814012005@news1.west.earthlink.net> on Fri, 14
> Jan 2005 20:45:45 GMT, Jack "FUDMEISTER" Zwick
> <jzwick3@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
>>Then why does Verizon say the following on their website:
>>
>>"Bluetooth is a low bandwidth, wireless networking technology designed
>>primarily to replace cables for communication between personal
>>computing and communication devices. It is intended to be used for
>>both voice and data communications. "
>
> Because it's true. But that proves nothing. What matters is what is
> promised for the phone.
>

Then how about this little ditty:

"And with Bluetooth® wireless technology, you can make hands-free, eyes-
free calls, and connect to your PC or PDA whenever and wherever you
want."

That comes straight out of the description for the V710 on Verizon's own
website...http://www.verizonwireless.com/b2c/store/controller?
item=equipmentUpgrade&action=viewPhoneDetail&selectedPhoneId=1570

Now, if that came off of Motorola's website for the phone, I'd have to
agree with you (John). Or if Verizon included a disclaimer somewhere on
that page that said words to the effect of "but we don't necessarily
enable this", or said something like "connect to the internet through
your PC", I'd also agree with you. But that paragraph appears on
Verizon's own website attached to that particular phone model's
description. Its not a comment about Bluetooth in general or Bluetooth
enabled phones in general. I don't know anyone who is phone savy or
computer savy who would read that paragraph and *not* believe that they
could transfer data between a V710 phone purchased from Verizon and a PC
or PDA, or think that the paragraph only applied to wireless headsets.

David
Anonymous
January 15, 2005 11:36:07 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular,alt.cellular,alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

David M. Moore wrote:
> Then how about this little ditty:
>
> "And with Bluetooth® wireless technology, you can make hands-free,
> eyes- free calls, and connect to your PC or PDA whenever and wherever
> you want."
>
> That comes straight out of the description for the V710 on Verizon's
> own website...http://www.verizonwireless.com/b2c/store/controller?
> item=equipmentUpgrade&action=viewPhoneDetail&selectedPhoneId=1570
>
> Now, if that came off of Motorola's website for the phone, I'd have to
> agree with you (John). Or if Verizon included a disclaimer somewhere
> on that page that said words to the effect of "but we don't
> necessarily enable this", or said something like "connect to the
> internet through your PC", I'd also agree with you. But that
> paragraph appears on Verizon's own website attached to that
> particular phone model's description. Its not a comment about
> Bluetooth in general or Bluetooth enabled phones in general. I don't
> know anyone who is phone savy or computer savy who would read that
> paragraph and *not* believe that they could transfer data between a
> V710 phone purchased from Verizon and a PC or PDA, or think that the
> paragraph only applied to wireless headsets.
>
> David

Well, it's a good thing you don't know me then, since I sell phones and
repair computers.... Cause if you learn how to read the actual words that
are written, rather than imagine what you want them to say, it specifically
only says "connect to your PC or PDA"..... it says absolutely nothing about
being able to transfer data... just connect (and it doesn't say what you can
connect to).. Guess I'm what you'd call the meaning of the words savvy....
:) 
Anonymous
January 15, 2005 12:47:16 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular,alt.cellular,alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <Xns95DF24A39B73Bdmm2002dmm2002dmm@140.99.99.130> on Sat, 15 Jan 2005
08:36:06 GMT, "David M. Moore" <davmooDEATH@TOgibbousmoonSPAMMERS.com> wrote:

>John Navas <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote in
>news:eC1Gd.2025$m31.23831@typhoon.sonic.net:
>
>> In <jzwick3-E7F213.14453814012005@news1.west.earthlink.net> on Fri, 14
>> Jan 2005 20:45:45 GMT, Jack "FUDMEISTER" Zwick
>> <jzwick3@mindspring.com> wrote:
>>
>>>Then why does Verizon say the following on their website:
>>>
>>>"Bluetooth is a low bandwidth, wireless networking technology designed
>>>primarily to replace cables for communication between personal
>>>computing and communication devices. It is intended to be used for
>>>both voice and data communications. "
>>
>> Because it's true. But that proves nothing. What matters is what is
>> promised for the phone.
>
>Then how about this little ditty:
>
>"And with Bluetooth® wireless technology, you can make hands-free, eyes-
>free calls, and connect to your PC or PDA whenever and wherever you
>want."

For what?

>That comes straight out of the description for the V710 on Verizon's own
>website...http://www.verizonwireless.com/b2c/store/controller?
>item=equipmentUpgrade&action=viewPhoneDetail&selectedPhoneId=1570

All I get at that URL is:

Upgrading our website

We are improving our web site to serve you better

We're currently upgrading our website and apologize for the inconvenience.
Please visit us again soon.

>Now, if that came off of Motorola's website for the phone, I'd have to
>agree with you (John). Or if Verizon included a disclaimer somewhere on
>that page that said words to the effect of "but we don't necessarily
>enable this", or said something like "connect to the internet through
>your PC", I'd also agree with you. But that paragraph appears on
>Verizon's own website attached to that particular phone model's
>description. Its not a comment about Bluetooth in general or Bluetooth
>enabled phones in general. I don't know anyone who is phone savy or
>computer savy who would read that paragraph and *not* believe that they
>could transfer data between a V710 phone purchased from Verizon and a PC
>or PDA, or think that the paragraph only applied to wireless headsets.

It could simply mean (say) a modem connection.

--
Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular&gt;
Anonymous
January 15, 2005 1:25:29 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular,alt.cellular,alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 16:34:41 -0700, "Quaoar" <quaoar@tenthplanet.net>
wrote:

>Jack Zwick wrote:
>> One can not transfer files (such as pictures taken) with the bluetooth
>> as configured in the Verizon model of the Motorola v710..
>> Upset users are suing:
>>
>> <http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&ncid=1293&e...
>> /tc_nm/telecoms_verizonwireless_lawsuit_dc&sid=95573419>
>
>This, of course, is going nowhere at high speed.

People need to wake the eff up and start voting with their DOLLARS.
VZW is a gigantic, arrogant company, an won't change until it loses
enough customers to competitors like Cingular who have a clue re:
Bluetooth and other features that customers want.

--
Friends don't let friends shop at Best Buy (except to buy loss leaders for resale on eBay).
(See http://tinyurl.com/6efhd)
January 15, 2005 3:41:06 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular,alt.cellular,alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

John Navas wrote:
> [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
>
> In <34ootcF49nudjU1@individual.net> on Thu, 13 Jan 2005 20:25:00 -0600,
> "Shaolin Superfly" <shaolinsuperfly@yinyang.com> wrote:
>
>
>>"Scott Stephenson" <scott.stephensonson@adelphia.net> wrote in message
>>news:4aGdnTR22pLFtnrcRVn-3A@adelphia.com...
>>
>>><glaabtom@netscape.net> wrote in message
>>>news:1105665280.454644.233640@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>>>
>>>>I just looked on the VerizonWireless site and on the V710 page it
>>>
>>>states, "And with Bluetooth® wireless technology, you can make
>>>hands-free, eyes-free calls, and connect to your PC or PDA whenever and
>>>wherever you want."
>>>
>>>
>>>>Since PCs and PDAs are not generally recognized as voice devices, it
>>>
>>>certainly seems that VZW is touting data capabilities. They don't say
>>>you can "connect your PC/PDA to the internet," they say you can
>>>"connect [your phone] to your PC or PDA". Connect _from_ where? The
>>>internet? Not likely.
>>>
>>>
>>>I can connect to my computer with my non-BT phone. It's not needed to
>>>connect and/or transfer data between the two.
>>
>>
>>But VZW advertises the ability to connect with Bluetooth then disables those
>>features in the phone.
>
>
> If Bluetooth works (and it does) then it's not disabled (and it isn't).
> Unless Verizon Wireless specifically promises features that aren't delivered,
> then there is NO CASE.
>

Just by mentioning the word "Bluetooth" makes Verizon liable.
Bluetooth IS a method for wireless data exchange with a computer.
    • 1 / 7
    • 2
    • 3
    • 4
    • 5
    • More pages
    • Next
    • Newest
!