AT&T defends its iPhone network via YouTube outreach - Page 3

Zzzz.........

Ever hear of the word ratio or proportion. Finland has 5.3 million people and almost a 99% cell phone penetration. Most Finns have 2 or more cell phones and their networks seem to run just fine based on the proportion of cell phone to population. The bottom line is that AT&T was lazy, and Apple saved their ass from the abyss.

Also, many to most antenna are installed on existing structures to include buildings, sides of buildings, silos, etc.... Towers is a misnomer.

It doesn't take a lot to cover Finland's population, despite its legendary ranking as one of the countries with the lowest population density in the world.

You cover the Greater Helsinki area, you cover 25% of Finland's population. You cover Copenhagen metropolitan area, you cover 1/3 of Denmark's population. Samething for the other neighbouring Scandinavian countries.

As a Canadian, if you cover Toronto, Montreal and Vancouver, you cover 1/3 of Canada's population.

ATT has always in all its iterations taken advantage of their customers unless brought to heel by government intervention.

Apple might have the strength to keep them more honest but as most posters have said, Verizon works just fine so why can't ATT.

I am a Apple fan, have always had an Apple computer since the Apple I and would buy a family iPhone plan the day Apple cans ATT or offers an alternative. ATT, Archer Daniels Midland, Chevron and all the rest of the cons can waste their money on feel good ads, the equivalent of the phone messages we all hear, " your call is important to us" but a wise consumer will not become a lemming.

Agree with you there.

All the other carriers are also charging anywhere from 2x to 4x as much for a single MMS as they charge for a single SMS.

Their spin might be believable if it weren't for the fact that AT&T sucked long before the iPhone came around. Their digital network has always been half baked.

Maybe if they hadn't tried to deploy a 1900 Mhz network on 800 MHz towers they could have had reliable coverage. But 1900 MHz has a shorter range, so of course it is going to be subpar. Moving some of their network back into 850 MHz will help, but as far as I'm concerned it's too little too late, and it won't help most customers, as the new deployment is only in select cities. Everybody else is stuck on the duct-tape-and-bailing wire network that is AT&T.

One of the greatest problems that AT&T customers currently have (especially iPhone users) is dropped calls. That should be an extremely rare occurrence on a properly designed network no matter how busy it is. We hear excuses that network congestion causes the dropped calls, but if that's true, it's about the worst technical decision ever made. They're essentially trying to tell us that somebody with a stronger signal trying to make a call is more important than you and the call you're already on. Calls in progress need to take priority, and if the network is designed differently they deserve the negative attention they are getting. If someone can't start a call they can almost always find another way. Dropped calls, on the other hand, can't always be reconnected (imagine placing a tech support call, waiting for a half hour to be connected to someone, only to be disconnected before resolving your issue. Have fun reconnecting that one.) Every time I talk to an AT&T customer I can guarantee with nearly 100% certainty that within 10 minutes (or less) the call is going to be dropped. Pathetic. This doesn't happen this badly with ANY other network.

Point is, AT&T is not a good wireless carrier, and they never have been. I was dumbfounded when Apple announced they were signing an exclusive contract for the iPhone in the US. ANY of the other wireless carriers in the US would have been a better choice. Verizon has the coverage, T-Mobile is the right technology (GSM) with properly spaced and configured towers in the areas they cover, and Sprint has tons of excess capacity. AT&T... really?

I think it's your bias that GSM is the "right" technology that leads you to your conclusion.

Somehow, CDMA is the "wrong" technology that "lost" the war against GSM --- but Qualcomm becomes the largest mobile technology in the whole world. Somehow, CDMA is a low-volume high cost technology that lost to the high volume low cost GSM --- yet Verizon is much more profitable than the rest of the telecom industry. Somehow, "freedom loving GSM" carriers have the lowest consumer satisfaction ratings and Verizon the controlling freak CDMA carrier has the highest consumer satisfaction rating.

Sounds like we're twins... been down the same roads as you, literally & figuratively!

My story when something like this tho...

Had Verizon 1st - hated their complete lack of OS X support when it came to software they developed on top of that I hated their stone-age view of features... Have they EVER gotten around to recognizing Bluetooth? I guess with all the pressure to force hands free usage I'm gonna guess they finally (kicking and screaming) deemed the technology as something they'd consider supporting...

Tho I'm confidant they're NOT taking full advantage of BT.

So Verizon had no support for the Mac and was only adopting stone-age hardware... (to be fair -- this was YEARS ago).

I decided I'd take my chances with a more forward thinking provider... AT&T didn't have a tower in my town and neither did Cingular but I rolled the dice and gave Cingular a shot. Well the hardware was better but I suffered when it came to signal strength...

After the merger I'm now with AT&T and the quality is a bit better but still not stupendous and like you said... they tend to drop calls and the drop of a dime. So... I'm quietly waiting and hoping that somehow someday I'll have a REAL carrier that I can happily switch over to....

Not holding my breath mind you!

Dave

Much like how Apple was kicking and screaming with bluetooth.

I've read a lot of posts and have the following response:

1. There is no evidence that Verizon would have the same problems AT&T has had. In fact, it's unlikely. Why? Because it's not just the iPhone. It's the voice service quality. AT&T sucked before the iPhone and it sucks now.

2. Seth the Blogger Guy? WTF? Why can't AT&T just post a video by a non-douche?

3. I've had my phone for about a year. I assume that since they're spending $18b this year, then they probably spent at least $10b from 8/08 to 8/09. $10b and I see no appreciable difference in network quality. None. Zero. Good job.

4. DEAR AT&T: Could you please fucking explain how enabling MMS on ONE model of phone is going to strain your network that much? You mean you'd rather see us e-mail those photos?

5. DEAR AT&T: Another thing...could you please stop advertising that your network is "The World's Fastest 3G Network" when it clearly SUCKS BALLS? Thank you.

6. Does anyone else find it absurd that we are even having this conversation about MMS? Really. This is what we're talking about...picture fucking messaging or the lack thereof? I could send picture messages on my LG piece of shit flip phone in the year 2003. I understand, but it's like speculating when my Mac is going to be able to read DVDs. "Well see, sir, there are these technical difficulties because DVDs carry vast amounts of data compared to CDs and while we realize others can do it we want your experience to be great right away so we're not going to give you the experience at all."

7. Seth is a douche.

8. Why does Seth the Douche Guy's explanation have to look like a 1950's medicine commercial and be so goddamned patronizing. "You see, we use this magic things called radio waves that work together with happy sunshine rays to bring your internet to you...." My Lord.

9. Have I mentioned I hate Seth?

You are exactly right. More apt comparisons would be Russia, Brazil, India, or China, given their land areas.

I don't know about Russia or Brazil, but India and China, despite being much poorer, seem to have achieved very good coverage across their impressive land masses. However, it's also possibly the case that they were able to leapfrog legacy infrastructures and technologies to be able to do so.

My original post was in regards to scaling and proportionality. Finland would not need as many BTS/BSC or OSS/BBS for its networks as AT&T would based on proportions if its population. WIth this in mind they are still able to meet a cell phone penetration of 99%, offer data services, MMS, etc.. while AT&T is struggling.

BTW: Most Finns consider themselves Nordics, as opposed to Scandinavians.

Yup, most businesses are that. Innovation? Vision? Exceptional customer care? Nope... It's all about the most cash flow at minimum customer-focused effort. I say minimum customer-focused because sure, these companies invest tons in accounting and legal ~ all to keep that cash flow ticking along.

Welcome to the world of "business as usual". Luckily in the US innovative companies and venture capital still exist, outside the realm of blue-chip juggernauts.

I just saw the screen capture in the AppleInsider article and I didn't even feel like watching the video. I thought he looked so un-PR-friendly because he was a top brass guy from AT&T. But a spokesperson? Sorry, AT&T didn't even bother to hire an actor or even a staff less un-PR-friendly. They could have even injected some humour in it by hiring an actor that looks like "PC guy" from the Mac ads. Or at least a moderately attractive woman that also sounds intelligent. I mean, it's still a marketing/ PR message.

I think AT&T automatically equates social media = low budget, less thinking required, w00t!

That's actually how these other carriers around the world "manage" MMS usage so it doesn't saturate the network, IMHO. By pricing it quite a bit higher... It's a "nice" feature but I don't know how many people favour it strongly over SMS.

You have an interesting point but [mobile Internet traffic != MMS] in many ways. In the sense that MMS implementation in other mobile OS and devices extends far beyond smartphones.

Therefore, the increase in strain on the ATT network due to MMS cannot be as much as the increase due to mobile Internet usage.

In the sense that so many other carriers, phones, etc. all have MMS. Would the iPhone increase MMS usage because it is the iPhone? Possibly. Is the MMS in iPhone far superior to other phones, smart or otherwise? Highly unlikely.

Ha Ha... Global Warming... Or, NONE LIKE IT HOT!
...
Ice cubes
...
"Just like Daddy puts in his drink in the morning.
Then he gets mad"
...

But the Finns also have to deal with iphone data plans with 100 MB, 250 MB and 1000 MB per month allowance.

http://www.sonera.fi/Puhelin+ja+liit...plen+iPhone+3G

http://www.sonera.fi/Puhelin%20ja%20.../iPhone+hinnat

Some of these carriers also "manage" their network by (1) crippling top speed to 384 kbps and (2) give you a tiny 100 MB, 250 MB or 1000 MB allowance.

They will happily give you the ability to tether your iphone for free --- but they only give you a 100 MB data allowance per month. You will blow that in an hour.

American companies have the vision that --- nobody will ever care about videocalling. The only 3G killer app that has lived to its billing --- is location based services, which the US is ahead of most countries.

Nobody cares about being able to buy a can of coca-cola from a vending machine by paying with your cell phone.

In a world where most of the revenue still come from voice calls, most of the "data ARPU" are still from SMS --- American companies are way way ahead of everybody else on usage.

Every time I see these articles I already know what the comments will say "I live in NYC" or "I live in SF" and those are always negative to ATT. I don't understand why att doesn't just pour money into those cities to upgrade their networks because all the negative press would disappear. I live in St Louis and recently took a road trip to alabama (Birmingham). Never had a issue with coverage (although most of the trip was on edge).

In st louis I would say att probably has the best coverage of the main 4 providers and in Birmingham the 3g coverage was amazing. Even took a day trip to Gulf Shores and the 3g coverage there was quite good (MLB TV video was on the highest quality). It seems like att wasn't prepared in NYC and SF before the iphone and when the iphone came out it just made it worse.

Having worked in the industry, it's not technobabble, but actual technical work that needs to be done to optimize the network for the huge load.

Go to college, get a degree in RF Engineering, then work in the industry before you make another comment that removes all doubt you are a fool.

NOT DEFENDING AT&T BUT….

(This is not about how bad AT&T is or anything about that... this is about MMS and how it works alone so please don't flame me for being an AT&T sympathizer. I'm definitely not. YOu can just substitute out AT&T for any other carrier you choose when reading this).

OK, think about it for a moment. If all the iPhone users now have access to their picture messaging and stats show that iPhone users use the MOST of their data plans (and why not - the iPhone is a dream to use), couple that with NO CHARGE for MMS (well it goes along with your TXTing count), then I can see iPhone users really jumping onboard to use the feature.

One of the things I’m fairly certain of is that MMS uses the same freqs as TXT and not the DATA network that say SAFARI or any of the other 1000’s of apps use. SO it’s that part of the spectrum that is being beefed up. TXT messages use up bytes of info - 140 characters per message. MMS will be using the same carrier to the tune of KB’s or MB’s. so I can see that as a point. Remember MMS has been around for a long time and its not until recently that with the explosion of Smart Phones that people would use it 10 fold. (Please, someone correct me if I am wrong about the freq point if I am wrong.)

Basically, I can see AT&T’s point. But at the same time they are a tremendously inferior system. But would the quantity of iPhone users in America suddenly moved to another provider be any better? We use our iPhones at 100% (or to a much greater degree than other phone users). Would we end up drowning them as well. We all know how people exclaim how good Verizon is but do they have the capacity to handle us? Kind of hard to know since I’m sure that even with all the supposed smart phones on their network, do they use it as much as we do.

I see this as spin, big time.

With the Apple event next week. I bet there is something that comes on the new devices not yet available for USA customers. You just watch.

On that you are probably soooo right. Or this first logical question any sane Apple owner would ask:

"Ooooo, (insert new product here)! Wonder what's the one thing is that they left off or removed!"

In our Labor Day weekend trip from Pittsburgh to Boone, NC, four of our AT&T phones have been utterly worthless, a fifth person who has a Verizon has had service this entire weekend, and for most of the trip down. I've had similar experience when we travel to upstate NY to visit family.

While I don't want to be an AT&T hater, network coverage is definitely their problem and they cannot blame it on anything but their own management decisions. Count me as a switcher as soon as Verizon is able to carry the iPhone.

In NYC we have tall buildings that reflect cell signals, so you need a lot of towers. And every new tower means first finding a building to allow it on the roof. Some buildings don't like the noise

In other words, AT&T did not anticipate the fact that iPhones users would actually use their iPhones. That means they sold data to large numbers of users without the capacity to handle those users. They sold their data, with the expectation that users would not use what they paid for. Once users actually started using what they paid for, their network was unable to cope. They should have only sold what they were capable of, instead of overselling their product, collecting the money and then being unable to deliver on their end of the contract. They should not be selling a product with the expectation that the only way they could provide the product is if the product was unused. That is a racket.

So, with MMS they are trying to handle it better. We will see if they are capable of supporting the users they have sold their product to or if it is just spin.

I find it funny that all of the Apple haters blamed Apple for not including MMS in iPhone OSX 2.0 on the 3G, when it now appears that this was likely done at AT&T request.

There is also no evidence that Verizon won't have these problems either.

AT&T completely dominates the west coast and their service is great when I travel To CA far better than Verizon. On the east coast though AT&T has had a harder time competing with Verizon who owns most of the towers in the area. NYC straight through most of the Hudson Valley corridor is dominated by Verizon towers.

my Iphone works just fine and even better when I travel. AT&T isn't great and Verizon is no better. Stop "gilding the lilly" and acting like you know what you are talking about and focus on the issue at hand, which is not "Steve the Blogger". They are both large corporations that want to maximize profits at the users expense and neither cares about your user experience. I doubt that Apple will be for long either. especially once Steve is gone.

To all the "I'm gonna leave AT&T as soon as the iPhone goes to Verizo, etc.....
How will your GSM iPhones work on Verizon's CDMA network? I've haven't read anywhere that Verizon is adding a new GSM network to their portfolio. Can you all enlighten me?

It really doesn't matter how many smart phones are on the network, what matters is how those phones are being used. And it has been shown that the iPhone accounts for a large portion of all traffic (I think it was 50% in the US and 33% worldwide). Those are huge numbers for a phone that has much less market share.

The iPhone casts a giant shadow on the Web

OS X, iPhone OS, Safari Market Share Continue Rebounding in May

Tell me about it. First it was gma could run motion so they crippled next gma, open gl went from 171% sown to 70%. Then they released better GPU but no FireWire bthen they brought back FireWire but removed express slot on all but 17" model.

It's always something. Fir those that don't know, you can use express slot for esata raid cards or high end audio FX taking all the processing off of the CPU. Am glad I have one in the last 15" with express slot which I'll never sell.

If they font come out with midrange non iMac, I think the next step would be a hack tosh as the dmg are so good these days, after you install, you can get apple updates no problem. Would also like to see a 4 core mini with external esata. Those would sell like hot cakes Nd mMs the 13 more powerful so you can buy all these devices and use. Node mode for logic, fcp suite. They need to get away from consumers and iLife. Uggg

since they marked down their computers, now is the time to intro stringer more affordable CPU computers.

Peace.

So what do you want AT&T to do?

(1) charge you $60 a month for a datacard plan because all the iphone users in the US used about as much data as a datacard subscriber.
(2) charge you $30 a month for a 1 GB data allowance per month.

Perhaps if AT&T devoted less bandwidth and resources to spying on Americans for the government, it would be able to provide the service they are charging for.

if the iphone were on verizon since day one, they would be overloaded and your calls would still be dropped. the iphone is 13.3% of the smartphone market and 50% - 66% of the mobile internet traffic.

if you think att is so greedy REMEMBER that verizon had a chance to be the exclusive carrier of the iPhone but they told apple to pound sand over visual voicemail. [they wanted to charge their customers that extra 70 seconds of navigating through audio menus every single time you check voicemail.]

Lots of torches and pitchforks in the air toward AT&T without much, if any, consideration for the facts of the situation. There are some good posts in here, too, but unfortunately they are being over shadowed by all the crying and screaming. Whats worse is that the objective viewpoints are likely being seen as AT&T apologists when they are only pointing out that the iPhones success would likely cause problems with any of the US carriers if the data usage was left as unregulated as it is on AT&Ts network.



Is there any info on how much the 3 other major US carriers have put into upping their network?



You are using marketing terms here: 3G and 4G. Do you know what they really mean? Do you realize that CDMA2000 is coming to a dead end that is requiring CDMA-based carriers to move to LTE (4G) as the next logical step and that UMTS (3G) is still in its infancy, thus allowing GSM-based carriers to use it effectively for many years to come with a more reliable and cheap foundation than LTE will be to CDMA-based carriers. Evolved HSPA, still considered 3G, will allow for 42Mbps down/22Mbps up. That is still a long way off considering we dont even have the HW to support those kind of 3G speeds in a phone. LTE has much greater potential than HSPA+, but that isnt why Verizon and most other CDMA-based carriers have chosen it. Theyve chosen it because its the best choice between WiMAX and now defunct UMB. I predict that well likely see HSPA+, still 3G, speeds besting LTE for some time to come, but by the time LTE is up to par GSM-based carriers will be well on their way to deploying LTE of their own. Sprint has dug themselves yet another hole with WiMAX.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution-Data_Optimized
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_Speed_Packet_Access
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolved_HSPA

"As of August 2009, there are 12 HSPA+ networks running in the world at 21Mbit/s and the first 28Mbit/s network has been completed in Italy. The first to launch was Telstra in Australia in late 2008, with Australia-wide access in February 2009 with speeds up to 21Mbit/sec."



I really want Verizon to get the iPhone so that we can see their network fall victim to such excessive usage and to alleviate some of the constraints on AT&Ts network.



There are great many places in China and India without coverage. I recall having problems in India and China where my pre-paid SIM didnt work on the network I was in, much like crossing over to another country in Europe. That just doesnt happen in the US. From Puerto Rico to Hawaii the same usage rates apply.



HAHA Next up, Electro-gonorrhea, the noisy killer.

Obviously it'll be with whatever the new offerings are.

I agree that Verizon's network would also be overloaded, no doubt about that.

Verizon's rejection of the iphone has nothing to do with visual voicemail, they rejected the iphone deal because Apple demanded revenue sharing and choice of distribution partners. The interview was given a few days after the Jobs keynote speech, but 5 months before the actual iphone launch --- so Verizon wasn't monday morning quarterbacking.

http://www.usatoday.com/tech/news/20...n-iphone_x.htm

2 years after the iphone has been launched, independent AT&T agents still can't sell the iphone --- makes those agents mad as hell.

If Verizon is going to get the iphone, for sure they are going to get hit with network performance.

But this is a game of which carrier would suck less, so it's not too hard for Verizon to retain the crown as "the network".