These are the words of a Verizon spokesperson, who is apparently comfortable acknowledging that Verizon's entire phone-choosing strategy is based on a false dilemma: That somehow, having a good network makes it impossible to have decent handsets, and vice-versa. But if having great coverage doesn't actually prevent Verizon from selling any of the smartphones that people actually want, how do they make it seem like it does?

It's easy, really! Just combine a strict, long handset testing process, extreme caution about new handset technologies, and a history of intrusively modifying both phone software and hardware to maintain obsessive control over its devices, and voila! Boredom. [Gadget Lab]

Here's the chronology: Cox, the cable and internet provider, announced plans to start a wireless network; Cox then clarified, stating that they actually meant that they were, at least for the time being, partnering with Comcast and Time Warner to piggyback off of Sprint in a venture called Pivot; this dissolved. Now, Cox is going it alone.

The announcement spares us the useful details, like when the network will go live, or what the flagship handsets or handset manufacturers might be. They are promising some kind of mobile TV, a carrier-wide app store, and mobile broadband, but none of these things are revolutionary, or even particularly exciting. But we really shouldn't be sour about this. New competition, even if it's from a stodgy old cable company like Cox, is more than welcome in the lumbering wireless industry. [WSJ]

Posting on its official blog [translated] , T-Mobile Netherlands says "the 3G coverage of T-Mobile is as good as the competition, there can therefore not lie. We suspect that it is a hardware / software specific issue of the iPhone itself." CNET sees that "can not lie" bit as web babel-talk for a Dutch expression meaning "so that should not be the issue."

And in a Sydney Morning Herald story, Vodafone Australia also blamed Apple hardware for sucky 3G, saying “We are aware of the issues on the iPhone 3G and we’re working with Apple to provide a solution." Another anonymous source mentions the carriers had no time for device testing prior to launch, since they received handsets just one day before they were to go onsale.

It makes sense. International customers have been enjoying 3G for a lot longer than AT&T folks here in the U.S., so they're more likely to gripe if things don't meet standards set by other phones in the last few years. [CNET, T-Mobile Netherlands [translated], Sydney Morning Herald via iLounge]

Gawker Media polls require Javascript; if you're viewing this in an RSS reader, click through to view in your Javascript-enabled web browser.

The New York Times has some options to improve the sad situation of current cell carrier coverage in some areas of the US. From passive options, like the $34.95 Freedom Antenna, to repeaters and signal boosters, like the $299 Spotwave Z1900 or the $399 Wi-Ex zBoost, which uses a 16-inch are-you-boosting-or-just-happy-to-see-me tube antenna. These boosters are FCC approved for consumer use but, apparently, you will run into problems if you ever decide to turn them on. The carriers say that they may wreak havoc in their networks, endanger lives by disrupting emergency services, kill puppies all over the world and destroy entire universes. Meanwhile, the manufacturers say that, while this may be true sometimes, their systems avoid such extremes. And finally, the FCC just seems clueless about their own conflicting regulations on the matter. Maybe the carriers should move their collective butts and either clarify their policy or extend their networks. Maybe that way we won't have to carry antennas like the one after the jump to get proper coverage. – Jesus Diaz

Coaxing More Bars Out of That Cellphone [New York Times]

Branding and building the Cingular line cost BellSouth $4 billion. Oh well.

AT&T Plans to Kill Cingular Brand [AdvertisingAge]

Jitterbug MVNO Targets Seniors [PhoneScoop]

Siemens, makers of GSM switching hardware and, in conjunction with BenQ, GSM phones, is saying that CDMA is on its way out in North America. Ummmm... Right. According to the peeps over at Siemens, more carriers are looking to migrate to the standard GSM networks instead of using CDMA. With market share of CDMA declining more and more every year, companies are looking to GSM for an answer. Numbers may or may not lie, but Sprint and Verizon ain't going anywhere, that's for sure. In related news, Coke execs said that Pepsi causes massive cramping and Apple says that Spain is going PowerPC all the way, eschewing Intel completely.

Will U.S. carriers switch mobile standards? [News.com]