or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › AT&T defends its iPhone network via YouTube outreach
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

AT&T defends its iPhone network via YouTube outreach - Page 2

post #41 of 211
Quote:
Originally Posted by liltechdude View Post

I don't agree with the notion that the other networks such as Verizon or Sprint would have had the same issues as ATT. Verizon, for example, has also seen a massive smartphone boom on their network, and they have upgraded their technology to cope with the increased workflow. That's why they are deploying LTE so quickly, because they expect the smartphone boom to continue to incline and cause more workload on the network. Another thing people have a lot of trouble realizing is the fact that the iPhone population isn't anything too crazy. The chunk of ATT's network that iPhones take up is not all that big. It's just sheer size of the population of people using the network. So this is not an iPhone specific problem. Verizon has plenty of customers who are grabbing data like crazy with their blackberries. I see more blackberries than I do iPhones where I live.

The point I'm trying to make is that the iPhone isn't the root of the problem with ATT right now. They simply aren't putting enough resources into building and maintaining their network to support the entire wireless ATT population.

I wonder how many latent future iPhone users are out there waiting until the iPhone hits other carriers. Surely this is a significant number.

Also, based on Flickr camera data, I believe that the iPhone significantly affect data usage. If the bandwidth were available, Apple would push (or at least customers) for more bandwidth intensive apps (think Over-The-Air use of Hulu, SlingBox, iTMS Movies).

Leisure usage trumps business usage for potential to saturate the network. I loved the email on my Blackberry when I had one, but it was a nightmare for consumer-based use.

You are right, though. It's not the fault of the iPhone, really, but, every carrier would want to limit the unlimited data plan (without losing a significant number of subscribers). It's in their best interest.
post #42 of 211
Quote:
Originally Posted by liltechdude View Post

Another thing people have a lot of trouble realizing is the fact that the iPhone population isn't anything too crazy. The chunk of ATT's network that iPhones take up is not all that big. It's just sheer size of the population of people using the network. So this is not an iPhone specific problem. Verizon has plenty of customers who are grabbing data like crazy with their blackberries. I see more blackberries than I do iPhones where I live.

I'm not sure that this is the case. While it's true that in terms of devices iPhones might not make up a large portion of AT&Ts network, I think that in terms of usage, the numbers are different.

Here's a chart a chart from earlier this year of mobile internet usage:



So when a small portion of one carrier can account for nearly 2/3 of all mobile internet traffic, I think that the logistics of deploying something like MMS for the iPhone can be a little more involved. I don't see 3 months from announcement to launch as being too long.

Just to be clear, I'm not entirely for AT&T nor am I particularly a big fan. But I think that if we don't source our arguments or direct our energies appropriately, then it only hurts the conversation. AT&T has a lot of problems, but I don't think this is one of them.

When I was with Verizon, my memory was that their business model was to severely limit the functionality of all of their the phones despite their capabilities. For example, I could neither transfer files to our from my LG phone on Verizon even though the phone supported it. From my limited knowledge of US carriers and their phone offerings, this seems to be a common practice. So I think that the concession AT&T made with the iPhone was a positive.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Thorsten View Post

This MMS stuff sounds like bull* to me or it has not been properly explained. We are sending Emails with pictures all the time over the iPhone. We are uploading videos to youtube. How come the network can handle that, but not a simple MMS, which probably won't be used too much since each MMS costs money, and Emails are FREE.

Again, this will be difficult to answer without understanding the human psychology behind it and just seeing it play out, but my intuition is that what draws people to MMS over email is the social aspect. While the iPhone is widely popular over the general population, for any given iPhone user, only a handful of their friends will also have iPhones. So if I took a video with my brand new iPhone 3GS (for example), I would disinclined to send it as an e-mail if I knew that my friend would have to go home to their computer and download it as an attachment. I think it's very much the sense of immediacy and connection to their friends, iPhone or not, which is worth the 25 cents to them. But that's just my theory
post #43 of 211
first - any 2 bit dork that uses youtube already knows how their cell phone and those ugly towers work.

Second - like someone above inferred - this looks like something that was made by microsoft... and that's gotta have SJ worrying. It probably solidified the decision to get away from AT&T.

p
post #44 of 211
Quote:
Originally Posted by slapppy View Post

I say good for them. What carrier company gives a rats ass to their customers. Apple has changed the status quo and AT&T had the guts to go with it. Give the guys some credit. At least they are working and trying to make it better. A few years ago your complaint goes in one ear and out the other, with a smidgen of laughter from the carriers during transit.

I agree with every word your saying.

And it also takes a little pressure off Apple. The amount of times i hear people blaming the iPhone for poor network coverage is unreal.
A reputation is not built upon the restful domain of one's comfort zone; it is made out of stalwart exposition of your core beliefs, for all challenges to disprove them as irrelevant hubris.- Berp...
Reply
A reputation is not built upon the restful domain of one's comfort zone; it is made out of stalwart exposition of your core beliefs, for all challenges to disprove them as irrelevant hubris.- Berp...
Reply
post #45 of 211
Quote:
Originally Posted by WelshDog View Post

Look AT&T is really SBC. And SBC was/is a hard nosed, cutthroat company more like Wal Mart than Apple. AT&T/SBC is also known for it's relentless legislative campaigns to get laws passed that specifically target their bottom line. Not just lobbying, but legislating from the board room. IMO they don't do anything the "right" way, they do it the cheap way. Just enough to get by while maximizing profit. Overbuilding a data network is not they way they roll. Under building a data network and locking in a super sweet deal with an innovator like Apple is their style. They have a dedicated army of white collar workers who do nothing but squeeze every dime out of their customers and suppliers. I know that sounds like just plain good business, but the way they do it is more like warfare. And sometimes we are the collateral damage.

Well if your right about the AT&T business model and Apple renew the contract for iPhone with them, then what will that tell you about Apple??
A reputation is not built upon the restful domain of one's comfort zone; it is made out of stalwart exposition of your core beliefs, for all challenges to disprove them as irrelevant hubris.- Berp...
Reply
A reputation is not built upon the restful domain of one's comfort zone; it is made out of stalwart exposition of your core beliefs, for all challenges to disprove them as irrelevant hubris.- Berp...
Reply
post #46 of 211
Well, that's it? Thanks blogger guy. I feel allot better now about taking it up the ***.

Whatever problems AT&T's had it's even easier to grasp, that they sell a mediocre product at an exorbitant "premium" rate than it was for that idiot to explain how mobile technology works. Such a pathetic and predictable attempt at quelling the masses. What's up with the "everyday geek" on a white backdrop these days? Are we supposed to feel invited by the tilt of his head and exaggerated bulging eyes? Frankly it was kinda creepy.

I agree with others. Apple did good. Whoever picks up the ball from AT&T will know that they had better leverage their quality of service as THE sellng point for future iphone contracts.
turtles all the way up and turtles all the way down... infinite context means infinite possibility
Reply
turtles all the way up and turtles all the way down... infinite context means infinite possibility
Reply
post #47 of 211
Quote:
Originally Posted by rnp1 View Post

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/0..._n_277867.html
10.6:
"IM NOT A SERVICE PACK!"


aww, he's quite a chubby little service pack.
post #48 of 211
Quote:
Originally Posted by RatherLinux View Post

Who is really at fault, that is Apple thank you, because of the exclusive only one carrier. If the iphone was unlocked the load of iphone users would be disbursed over several carriers and not only ATnT. Steve is really holding apple back just so he can have a huge paycheck for himself.

You're right, he must love that nice, shiny dollar every year...

I really think I need to play devil's advocate here for a moment. Even though it appears that AT&T is lagging behind when it comes to updating their network compared to Verizon or Sprint , remember that AT&T has double to triple the data demand that they do. While they're certainly not doing as good a job as they could be doing, they are trying very hard to manage something that most of us would certainly not know where to start, although for the record, they certainly don't know where to start when it comes to making a PR video.
post #49 of 211
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeremyling View Post

USA does have more land and to provide the coverage like other countries is very hard but the fact is we had to wait over 10 yrs before US had 3G that is unacceptable. and honestly i feel bad for everyone who uses an iphone especially those who still have the first generation ones. you basically bought a cell phone that had technology back in the 90s and you paid a premium for it but that still doesnt excuse at&t for providing such a bad network. i made my choice i will never buy an iphone in the states i will however go overseas buy the unlock 3gs and bring it back here to use a little more money yes but i dotn have to go with att. Apple should just pay att off and get off their deal and just open the ifone to everyone that way they will definitely increase their marketshare by a lot

We've gonevfron 3rd to 28th in terms of broadband too, worldwide. I hope the givermenr steps in and regulates this scam the telco/ cable providers lobbiests use to screw us.
post #50 of 211
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Underhill View Post

Well if your right about the AT&T business model and Apple renew the contract for iPhone with them, then what will that tell you about Apple??

Why doesn't EVERYONE google hiw txt messages usevZERO bandwidth. With images it will be different, but thus data plan and txt MSG plan is for the birds. Jail break it and tell them to piss off.
post #51 of 211
Quote:
Originally Posted by 7600/132 View Post

Does anyone else think this sounds like meaningless technobabble? I could understand if they said they needed to upgrade their base stations, but calibrate them? What are they gonna do? Tilt the antennae 5° to the left?

Actually, if they are using a different radio spectrum than they anticipated to transmit MMS then the base stations may in fact have needed to be calibrated. When they calibrate them they are (among other things I'm sure) making sure that when they tune they remove any offsets that are inherent in the base station, tune or adjust voltage controlled oscillators etc to make sure that potential errors of reception and transmission are mitigated.

I'm not pleading ATT's case, they have really fallen asleep at the switch, and I assume it will cost them huge $$ once Verizon gets a version of the iPhone.
post #52 of 211
Quote:
Originally Posted by Twigg View Post

Oh now your working on it?

AT&T has been building out their network since before the first iPhone hit the shelfs. In fact between them and the other carriers they even drew congressional interest due to tower construction accidents. To imply AT&T is not working on it is simply silly.
Quote:
Don't use the excuse that their are just so many smartphone on your network and that they are straining your network so much.

it is not an excuse, not even Jobs himself predicted the success of iPhone.
Quote:
You had two years to prepare for this, don't act like this smartphone boom just surprised you. Look at Verizon and Sprint, you just being lazy, really lazy.



Do either Verizon or Sprint have customers using their network like iPhone users? If you have half a brain you would know the answer to that question. Oh buy the way the use of the RF spectrum is highly regulated, you just don't start using random bandwidth to satisfy your needs.
Quote:
Your finally investing in your network when it's past it's capacity

Quote:
. Nice job. And who the heck pushed for having smartphone on your network? You.

Nope; Apple pushed for the deal because the other carriers didn't want to play ball.

Well that sort of makes sense after their experience with iPhone. They don't want to get caught with their pants down.

The reality is AT&T service varies dramatically with location. Where I'm at they do as good or better than my old verizon phone. In some areas AT&T is or was bad simply due to the transmit frequency of the cell tower. Beyond the issue of regulation you have the problem of reoutfitting the tower for the new RF signal. This can mean anything from new antennas to new transmitters.

One thing that is obvious in this thread is that many people don't have a clue. Really if there was a little understanding here about radio systems or even physics many of the comments that have been made would not be here. The common refrain is that there are people here talking out of their ass.



Dave
post #53 of 211
Folks say what you want, but Verizon, Sprint and other would very likely be in the same place had they been the vendor of choice why you ask. Well let's look at it.

Say Verizon had the contract, and the iPhone worked well on the network, then more folks would have purchased them, and hence taxiing the system even more, causing it to NT work as promised.


If and when Verizon gets a contract to sell and offer the iPhone, and IF EVERYONE switches over, do you think they will be ready for MILLIONS of new subscribers , calling and texting all of their friends and how great the iPhone is now that it's o (oops sorry I just lost my connection).

The Good news is Verizon is getting a 2, 3, 4 year jump on issues they currently don't have to deal with, so if they are smart, they are getting ready, and have a system in place that IS in fact, more then is needed (at this time) and they WILL be ready for the mass migration of cell phone users to Verizon when and if it happens.

Boy, to anyone who has stock in AT&T PLEASE pay attention to when the current contract expires with Apple, and SELL, SELL, SELL before it's over

Hey folks, I live in the northern country of Maine (Just a stones throw from Boston, and NY), and I am on Verizon, and I have DROPPED calls ALL THE TIME - so I'm not expecting a miracle when and if they get APple as a client.

And in my opinion, Verizon WILL take care of the big cities first, and countries like Maine will not even show up on their radar for some time.

Hell they sold their land line business dealings in New England to Fairpoint, which has been a disaster from the start.

So even Verizon, is looking out for number one, and who knows what that means for the rest of us?

Skip
post #54 of 211
Investment in towers is quite slow rescue. Why wouldn't AT&T bother to look at what others do? We don't drop calls on our iPhones.

We mean Apple no harm.

People are lovers, basically. -- Engadget livebloggers at the iPad mini event.

Reply

We mean Apple no harm.

People are lovers, basically. -- Engadget livebloggers at the iPad mini event.

Reply
post #55 of 211
Quote:
"We've been working for months to prepare the radio access controllers in our network to support this launch. That means calibrating base stations all over the country, and frankly that's a very time-consuming process. MMS for the iPhone will be coming on September 25th. We wanted to make sure that when MMS for the iPhone launches, the experience was great. We wanted to get it right."

translation:

"Our network sucks ass. We know this as well as you. We heard you so please STFU already. We honestly did not realize that if we sold a phone that would enable users to actually use data that those user would actually end up using data. How were we to expect that? We had Apple delay MMS in 2.0 because we learned that if it is on the iPhone, customers might actually use it. While we would have prefered to delay it indefinately, Apple has gone ahead and included it 3.0. We can't blame them for it missing anymore and we are getting raked for our flagship smartphone not having MMS. We tried to delay a little longer by claiming our planned network maintanence was actually us trying to prep for millions of iPhone users actually using MMS. But we promised end of summer, so what the he'll, it's on.

You thought out network sucked before, just wait. You ain't seen nothing yet."

"My 8th grade math teacher once said: "You can't help it if you're dumb, you are born that way. But stupid is self inflicted."" -Hiro. 

...sometimes it's both
Reply

"My 8th grade math teacher once said: "You can't help it if you're dumb, you are born that way. But stupid is self inflicted."" -Hiro. 

...sometimes it's both
Reply
post #56 of 211
double post
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
post #57 of 211
Blackberries use less than a tenth of the data of other smartphone's this is due to the BIS (which you pay for on top of a voice plan) directing all traffic through RIM's servers where it is compressed and pushed out to the handset.

This is why Blackberries work so well even on 2G networks.

The 3G models are capable of heavier data use, e.g. video streaming.

As this requires the addition of another data plan on top of the BIS subscription and voice plan, I don't think that many people would be using those functions. (I am basing that assumption on all the peopleI've seen here, who whine about paying for data).

Two thirds of ALL mobile data traffic in the US is used by iPhone's i.e. AT&T.


Quote:
Originally Posted by liltechdude View Post

Verizon has plenty of customers who are grabbing data like crazy with their blackberries. I see more blackberries than I do iPhones where I live.
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
post #58 of 211
Seriously ATT WTF!?!?!? I think we should be pro-rated all the MMS fees we've been paying since day one. The SMS plan I pay for is exactly the same as other ATT users and that includes MMS! ATT even went so far as to say they wouldn't charge us more for MMS. Fuck that we've been paying for it the whole time and they just haven't delivered. Don't get me started on why we are paying for SMS/MMS independently of our mandatory UNLIMITED data plan in the first place.
post #59 of 211
Quote:
Originally Posted by ivan.rnn01 View Post

Investment in towers is quite slow rescue. Why wouldn't AT&T bother to look at what others do? We don't drop calls on our iPhones.

Yeah sure..
post #60 of 211
Sigh... Oh AT&T, I am so gonna drop you when Verizon gets an iPhone. For me, right now, the thing that bugs me most about AT&T isn't MMS (but there shouldn't be a reason why it doesn't work) but tethering! Why oh why does it seem that every other carrier in the world offers iPhone tethering for free, but here in the US? Noooo... that's 55 bucks. Huh???

Now to be fair, people are claiming that "AT&T has to charge us more because the United States has a larger continental land mass area. They need to accomodate users in rural America." I'd be sympathetic to that belief, if it made sense. Every day I drive out to the middle of a major metropolitan city to go to school. Right in the middle of town, right in the center of everything, service sucks. I have to use Edge, I never have a call that lasts more than 30 seconds, and I just put it in airplane mode. Now onto the country issue. One can assume with greater land mass, the more users you have. More users, more profit, more money to improve your network. I mean, how far does my, and millions of others', $80/month stretch?

Your move AT&T YouTube spokeswhore.
post #61 of 211
Quote:
Originally Posted by 7600/132 View Post

Does anyone else think this sounds like meaningless technobabble? I could understand if they said they needed to upgrade their base stations, but calibrate them? What are they gonna do? Tilt the antennae 5° to the left?

Please. I always hate it when one person tries to explain things reasonably in nontechnical terms, and the next person calls it technobabble. You don't get the idea of calibrating receivers? Fine. You don't get it. That's why he adds that it's very time consuming. That's about as nontechnical as humanly possible. And it's still too technical for you? And you're making fun of them??
post #62 of 211
http://bestinshowonline.warnerbros.com/cast/levy.html

The head tilt and the hair is horrible. They really should have chosen another spokesperson.
post #63 of 211
Quote:
Originally Posted by steviet02 View Post

Actually, if they are using a different radio spectrum than they anticipated to transmit MMS then the base stations may in fact have needed to be calibrated. When they calibrate them they are (among other things I'm sure) making sure that when they tune they remove any offsets that are inherent in the base station, tune or adjust voltage controlled oscillators etc to make sure that potential errors of reception and transmission are mitigated.

I think everyone's experience is that when someone uses a word like "calibrate" in a vague, condescending sense they are mostly throwing up a smoke screen. ("Looks like we'll need to calibrate your frammis. It's gonna take some time and cost as much as my boat payment.")

If there are technical reasons involving specific adjustments at their towers that delayed the enabling of MMS (beyond AT&T's general network overload) they should explain them in plain, non-technical English, or just say "we screwed up and our network wasn't ready". (As well as explaining why this affected them so much but not other iPhone carriers.) "Calibration" smacks of hand-waving and just makes them look like they are trying to BS their way out of this.

Obviously, they are responding to the spate of articles over the last few days discussing their "PR nightmare." But, doing so in the way they have simply compounds the problem. No one trusts them to begin with, so putting out videos with vague language that basically say, "Hey, it's not our fault," isn't convincing to say the least. I suspect their PR nightmare will continue unless and until they actually get their network up to speed.

In the meantime, being nice to their customers and dropping their hard-ass attitude might have some mitigating effects. They might want to start that now, before they lose exclusivity, before it's too late.

I doubt it, though. As pointed out in a previous response AT&T/SBC has a long corporate culture of "waging war" on their customers, and there's no reason to believe they've suddenly seen the light. The upside for customers is that this sort of attitude increases the likelihood of meaningful regulation of the wireless industry.
post #64 of 211
looking from a 30,000 ft. perspective.. why is AT&T investing this much in 3G? By this time next year, Verizon is planning LTE (4G) ... I could be missing many factors into this, but it's like if 4G wasn't on the rise, AT&T would be throwing money at EDGE... seems like they're a step behind... i'm hoping verizon gets the iPhone....
post #65 of 211
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

Our service in the US is positively stone-age compared to South Korea, for example.

I'm not defending US carriers, but it's apples and oranges when you compare these. Most States are larger than South Korea. US carriers have to negotiate with 50 of them in a huge area that's got far varied terrain than most countries. If a US carrier only had to supply service to just one state, I think you'd see a far different result. "Stone Age" is way over the top. Service needs improvement, but it's fairly good in most places.
post #66 of 211
Quote:
Originally Posted by Synotic View Post

.... with Verizon, my memory was that their business model was to severely limit the functionality of all of their the phones despite their capabilities

Excellent insight. That's how they've controlled their bandwidth.

OTOH, in fairness to ATT, they've let Apple (largely) dictate the user experience.

Like I've said before, wait till (and if) Verizon gets the iPhone. They'll be on their knees too, crying 'uncle.' They should be careful what they wish for!
post #67 of 211
Quote:
Originally Posted by technohermit View Post

None of them get it guys, and it's a lack of real competition that matters. All of our services are inferior to the rest of the world, because they went and spent their money on wireless infrastructure. It is the easiest way to reach everyone and provide them with decent service.
The companies we have here just don't get it.
Here's some pleasant reading on what they actually think:
http://arstechnica.com/telecom/news/...nd-bar-low.ars

Each time i travel to other countries there phone services work great. But they are, I believe, considerably more expensive than in the USA. My friends in Europe pay a lot more each month on average to do their dialing then we do. A friend from New Zealand says that the cost of data is so high it discourages use of feature phones. "Unlimited" is impossible to buy in many countries or is unaffordable as compared to here in the USA. Plans for high or unlimited data use do not even exist in some countries - as the cost per mb starts rolling with very little use.

so what is the real gig here? Is it that demand is exceeding supply? Is it that demand deserves an expanded distribution to other providers who have less burden on their networks? Is it that we don't really know the REAL cost of data and phone services in other countries that offer better coverage and less dropped calls? Is it that in some countries, phone service is a monopoly harvested by government oversight, while here it is a monopoly harvested by bribes paid to government entities (stuff like "Special interest groups and lobbyists in Washington spent a whopping 13 billion" in the headlines).. Or is it ALL OF THE ABOVE?

my guess is that it is ALL OF THE ABOVE
post #68 of 211
Quote:
Originally Posted by keeneye4obvious View Post

Oh please. I had AT&T when it was Cingular and had tons of dropped calls in the NYC, Northern NJ area. I switched to Verizon and the service was flawless. Never dropped a call. Being an Apple user, I have wanted the iPhone since it was introduced but have waited hoping there would be a Verizon version. With the introduction of the 3GS and no Verizon version, I made the switch being assured the network is much better. I have so many dropped calls and times I can't even get a signal it is ridiculous. I couldn't even get a signal on I-78 in a metro area. As soon as there is a Verizon version, I will gladly pay the early termination fee and be done with AT&T forever.



I for one think this whole "At&t sucks, Im going to Verizon" thing is funny. First of all, Kudos for At&t for even taking a chance on the iphone. Second, i believe that even if the iphone were produced from Verizon that we would still be in the same boat. It is obvious that iphone users use a tremendous amount of data. So to say that the iphone would be better if it were launched by verizon is not a safe assumption. With the amount of social networking and youtubing that people do on the iphone, would cause a strain on any carrier.

Everyone has their own story about how they have slow data speeds or dropped calls with their carrier. I had verizon and had dropped calls galore where i lived. As far as mms goes, when i switched to the iphone from a blackberry i really didnt miss the whole mms thing. The only thing that would benefit me is the tethering function. But then again wifi is so widespread that i can just jump on and surf that way.

The point is that the only other carrier that would even begin to support the iphone is verizon. If and when they get the iphone, they will experience a similar scenario. It may be easier on them though because they are learning from At&t's mishaps. But im sticking to my guns when i say that if verizon had launched the iphone first, then we would still be experiencing the same problems as we are right now.
post #69 of 211
A man in a nice shirt is going to is not going to convince me that AT&T is not asleep at the switch.

AT&T is run like it's owned by the government - slow and unresponsive.

AT&T is a big, fat cow. If I had a choice I would be at another service provider in a split second.
post #70 of 211
And you did your own study on this? Did you work for AT&T's and Verizon's IT department? Where do you gain such knowledge that you feel you can believe that Verizon would have had the same level of service?


Quote:
Originally Posted by tekneeq84 View Post

I for one think this whole "At&t sucks, Im going to Verizon" thing is funny. First of all, Kudos for At&t for even taking a chance on the iphone. Second, i believe that even if the iphone were produced from Verizon that we would still be in the same boat. It is obvious that iphone users use a tremendous amount of data. So to say that the iphone would be better if it were launched by verizon is not a safe assumption. With the amount of social networking and youtubing that people do on the iphone, would cause a strain on any carrier.

Everyone has their own story about how they have slow data speeds or dropped calls with their carrier. I had verizon and had dropped calls galore where i lived. As far as mms goes, when i switched to the iphone from a blackberry i really didnt miss the whole mms thing. The only thing that would benefit me is the tethering function. But then again wifi is so widespread that i can just jump on and surf that way.

The point is that the only other carrier that would even begin to support the iphone is verizon. If and when they get the iphone, they will experience a similar scenario. It may be easier on them though because they are learning from At&t's mishaps. But im sticking to my guns when i say that if verizon had launched the iphone first, then we would still be experiencing the same problems as we are right now.
post #71 of 211
Usual for this country. Seems like these days, most ad money is spent trying to convince us that the "new improved" crap they are trying to sell us is what we want. Just when was it that advertising turned from informing the consumer to brainwashing them?
post #72 of 211
OK, I like the figures but it's an invalid comparison. Netapps does not equate to MMS. Sure, the smartphones are putting more strain on a network because you can actually use a web-based app now but MMS has nothing to so with that and has been around for many years. Now, AT&T, if you want to tell me that your bandwidth has been sucked up, that I will believe and merely say, build up or shut up.
post #73 of 211
For those that don't want to take the time to watch the video, I will summarize:

1) We sold lots of iPhones but our network can't handle the data requirements.

2) We are concerned about our users' experiences but not so concerned that we would stop selling iPhones on our hopelessly overtaxed network because we like money.

3) You are in a two year agreement so suck it and hope that our network upgrades won't be a day late and a dollar short when they finally arrive in 2010 sometime...if you are lucky.

To get the full video experience, read the above and pretend it is being said by the goofiest looking person you ever saw.

-kpluck

Do you use MagicJack?

The default settings will automatically charge your credit card each year for service renewal. You will not be notified or warned in anyway. You can turn auto renewal off.

Reply

Do you use MagicJack?

The default settings will automatically charge your credit card each year for service renewal. You will not be notified or warned in anyway. You can turn auto renewal off.

Reply
post #74 of 211
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Underhill View Post

Well if your right about the AT&T business model and Apple renew the contract for iPhone with them, then what will that tell you about Apple??

I agree with your point to some degree. Yes Apple are a going concern and are obligated by their corporate charter to enhance shareholder value (that means make as much money as possible). However, Apple seems to have a different ratio when it comes to balancing product quality against profit motive. AT&T is tilted way to the profit side and I don't think they innovate as much as they could. Apple seems to internally value product quality as facet of their corporate culture and yet still makes a massive profit. Imagine what AT&T could achieve if they could drag themselves out of the Microsoft/Wal Mart business model swamp and be ore like Apple.
post #75 of 211
There are fundamental differences between the ATT versus Verizon and Sprint wireless networks. ATT 3G uses a version of CDMA called WDMA over 5 MHz channel. Voice and data travel in coded packets. Voice is not a big user of resources, but data is... when there is too much data, voice calls that are data anyway, get affected. Also the size of the coverage decreases and the cell "breathes in".

VZ and Sprint used CDMA over smaller channels that are 1.25 MHz wide. They can comingle voice and data, but instead have a separate data channel called EVDO. So voice and data do not interfere with each other.

Why do we have separate tech? Qualcomm "invented" CDMA in the current version and they control the chip and royalties of about 5.5% per handset. The GSM cabal, particularly the EU did not like that. So they came up with their own version called WCDMA or UMTS/3G. Dilutes some of the American company patents and forces them into cross licensing. The result was miss match of tech. It is ok for voice, but sucks for mass use of data.

ATT is not run by dummies... they were forced into the wrong technical standard because of the need for global roaming. The will have to spends tens of $Bs to make up for this problem. I am not even optimistic about LTE. The tech not mature, certainly not the handset chipsets.

Apple may have no choice but to sell to the CDMA carriers with the appropriate radio set.
post #76 of 211

...including spending between $17 to $18 billion on upgrades scheduled for this year on top of the $38 billion invested over the past two years.

I wonder how much of this "investment" is delayed because it is AT&T is hoping to fund it out of stimulus funds that won't be announced until later this year, or available until next year.

This is just what the struggling taxpayers need, with real unemployment approaching 20%, another mega corporation suckling on the taxpayers teat in order to subsidize their infrastructure that only benefits the most wealthy single digit percentage of cellphone users.
post #77 of 211
Quote:
Originally Posted by GorillaStatz View Post

Since South Korea is about the size of New Jersey it must be easier to provide service as compared to.... The USA!!! What's it take maybe 25 cell towers to cover the whole country?

Technology comparisons are valid even if the reason for their existence may differ.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #78 of 211
Don't give me these weirdo sideways head videos asking for our understanding- all you carriers are assholes engaging in anti-competitive behavior.

It's called capitalism!

It forces competition, and enables increases in the sophistication of consumer goods and decreases in price.

If you suck, you lose customers... except when capitalism is circumvented by tinges like exclusive contracts, designed only to benefit the companies that engage in them and provide a buffer between the way they want to do business and the demands of capitalism.

If apple had released the iphone on every network simultaneously, we would not have this discussion. ATT would have gotten their shit together.

You want to make it up to us ATT? Give your customers free incoming MMS, $30 a month for tethering with unlimited data, or a simple $5/day charge for 24 hours of tethering for those times when we are on business and truly cannot find free wifi.

Man I can't wait for this exclusivity crap to end... bring on T-Mobile and Sprint with the iPhone.
post #79 of 211
[QUOTE=rnp1;1476483]
Quote:
Originally Posted by aplnub View Post

Maybe the dilithium phase crystals needed a a tri-corder waved over them and they had to crawl through the Jeffries Tubes to reach them in the port nacelle. It's AT&T. They are getting nervous in advance of Verizon's 4G network and inevitable iPhone deployment.[/QUOTE

"Don't mince words Bones, whadahu really think?"

actually, that quote would be inappropriate since Bones was in the original series, and the term jeffries tubes was never used until the next generation.

(read above response with requisite robot-chicken-nerd-style lisp.)
post #80 of 211
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

You're right about lowering your expectations. Too many people have been expecting far too much relative to existing technology. Our service in the US is positively stone-age compared to South Korea, for example.

The grass is never greener on the other side.

South Korea's largest carrier owns more than 50% of the market share. Their government imposed a Korea-made mobile API on every cell phone in Korea that nobody uses. Their governmnet forced the CEO of LG Telecom to resign because the government gave the carrier a ev-dv license and ev-dv doesn't exist in real life. Their government forced 2 wibro (korean version of wimax) licenses on 2 carriers and after spending some real money on the network --- nobody actually uses it.

And what sort of idiotic regulation forces you to lose your telephone if you go from an ev-do (which is "considered" to be 2G in Korea) phone to a HSDPA phone. And we are not talking about changing to a different cell phone carrier. You stay with your current carrier and the government regulation requires that you lose your telephone number.

http://telecomskorea.com/index.php/P...-2g-cdmaq.html
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › AT&T defends its iPhone network via YouTube outreach