Quote:
Originally Posted by
teckstud 
But don't you think it could also be a mistake for AT&T? Thank god AT&T helped start the iPhone but once APple pulls the plug or goes multi-carrier in the US , AT&T will be in much worse shape than Verizon. Don't you think? I mean Verizon will suffer in the short term but AT&T will in the long term.
Yes, it could be a mistake for AT&T.
The iPhone brought them customers, but has earned a bad reputation with many of those customers.
Or at least that's how it seems. Is it a really common anti-AT&T feeling amongst customers, or just in the customers interested enough in Apple to post online?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
arTem1s 
The attitude of the two companies couldn't be more different.
Apple is innovative and gives stellar service with iPhone (if a little restrictive with developers) whereas ATandT gives appalling 3G service (especially in the LA area) and gouges its customers with restrictions on access designed to chisel as much money as possible -- consider travel abroad, or using the iPhone as a modem to a lap-top.
Their MMS blocks make no sense to me. And their coverage is something they're entirely responsible for.
I wouldn't criticise them for expensive roaming charges (the ALL do this, as much as I hate it). I think it's fair to minimise tethering too - AT&T provided unlimited data for iPhones which is incredibly enabling to iPhone users (we outside the US have to think about using apps which will download too much data... avoid any music over 3G unless you know what you're doing!). We get free tethering, but only 500MB of data.
I'm very surprised that AT&T got a bad rep for those, and a bad rep for subsidising the phone but not letting people drop their contract a year early (at a $200 cost to AT&T).
One thing is sure, AT&T has managed their customer perceptions badly.
And I'm not sure whether the monthly fees (for a subsidised phone) are similar, more, or less than Verizon.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
arTem1s 
The argument might run -- greed is good and ATandT is beholden to its shareholders, but I am not pleased with my treatment, not only with the iPhone agreement but other nickle and dimeing to death that ATandT marketing dreams up to bundle and foist upon their clientele.
So many people say that companies have a duty to their shareholders to make more money. It seems they miss 2 key issues
1) charging more doesn't mean you get more customers... it can be bad for making money!
2) if an individual/person tries to cheat us of our money, we don't say "that's okay, he has a duty to himself to make more money"... we say "I get it, I don't like him, I think what he's doing is wrong, and I will avoid dealing with him". Why is it okay or encouraged if it's a company but wrong for individuals?