or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › AT&T CEO bemoans iPhone unlimited data, iMessage
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

AT&T CEO bemoans iPhone unlimited data, iMessage - Page 3

post #81 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

 

Except they can. Because they do. Because no one cares enough to stop them, and the people in charge of stopping them are being paid off by the people doing the un-stopping.

 

Pretty much, yes.  At least "they" effectively stopped the AT&T/T-Mobile merger.  There was pretty much no common sense argument for allowing that.  

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by frankie View Post

Uh, yes.

 

De-regulation is the cause of most of this country's problems.  We literally would not be in this mess were it not for de-regulation.

 

That is completely false, and the result wrongheaded thinking.  In most cases, government intervention ("regulation") is the cause of problems.  This is not to say that we should end all regulation, of course.  But in so many cases, the government ends up stifling innovation.  Ask many people why the economy nearly collapsed in 2008, and if you don't get "Bush" you'll get "deregulation."  In fact, the oppose is true.  The government started meddling in the markets with Community Reinvestment Act in 1970s, and expanded that meddling with it's re-authorization in the 1990s.  Banks were forced to make questionable loans ('sub primes") by the government, which in turn was being shaken down by the likes of Jesse Jackson et al.  The result?  A subprime mortgage crisis that infected nearly the entire economy.  I'm not trying to get political here, but in all seriousness..."deregulation" is not the issue.  

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post

 

Please clarify. I see nothing in the post you replied to that justifies that kind of an insult.  

Also, calling (or implying) another poster dumb is often infraction worthy, and it is not an appropriate reply. I don't agree that Tallest's post is report worthy.

 

Just a word of thanks for being an evenhanded mod, Jeff.  I agree with you after having read both posts. 

I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #82 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

We're Americans. We're incredible at this sort of thing. It's the last few decades that these idiots (not just the telecoms) have become complacent and lazy.

The last few decades - well that would account for quite a large part of your american history! ;)

 

In the mobile broadband history the last few decades would be enough to say the entire history of mobile broadband.

 

I must say that you have some work to be done in this area but you are also a huge country to cover.

post #83 of 124

The comment about alternative texting services makes me the most mad. After shoving their malformed corporate member in their customer's metaphorical pooper for years, complaining about competition is like whining that they aren't allowed to splatter love chowder in our hair. AT&T, you are an abusive company undeserving of sympathy.

post #84 of 124
That last comment was awesome. Also, why the hell does this forum not support the Safari browser on iPhone???
post #85 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by dysamoria View Post
Also, why the hell does this forum not support the Safari browser on iPhone???


It does, just not well.

Originally Posted by Slurpy

There's just a TINY chance that Apple will also be able to figure out payments. Oh wait, they did already… …and you’re already f*ed.

 

Reply

Originally Posted by Slurpy

There's just a TINY chance that Apple will also be able to figure out payments. Oh wait, they did already… …and you’re already f*ed.

 

Reply
post #86 of 124
Instead of conceptualizing and implementing new compelling services AT&T's management seems to bemoan that new demands are being placed on their network and this will force them to invest in equipment.

Unlimited data at least cleared the way for new applications to take hold, like e-commerce (that is still struggling in this country). AT&T's CEO lack of vision is astounding - charge $0.25 for a text? Really?

This is the sort of boneheaded monopolistic thinking that has turned the US into a telecom third world country that lags in innovation. If the AT&T CEO has no vision his shareholders should get rid of him, he can be replaced by a $30 adding machine.
post #87 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

"Every additional megabyte you use in this network, I have to invest capital."

 

Q: So, Randall, why is investing in your network a bad thing?

 

A: Because the cell carriers are an oligopoly.  They only need to be barely good enough to keep customers from quitting en masse.

 

And they all know that.

Sent from my iPhone Simulator

Reply

Sent from my iPhone Simulator

Reply
post #88 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

1. Your texts cost you $0.00.000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 to send. You charge us $20 for a couple hundred. Screw you.

2. Yeah, unlimited data was a mistake; you're either too stupid or too inept to build out your network properly to meet the demand of modern society. Look at Japan. They're proof that it's possible and you're lying.

The problem is that demand has grown faster than anyone could ever foresee and keep up with.
No one ever thought we'd use our devices to watch Netflix, Hulu, HBO, or use it as a wifi hotspot.
You can't compare Japan and the US without taking land mass and population into consideration.
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #89 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post
The problem is that demand has grown faster than anyone could ever… …keep up with.

 

The Japanese, South Koreans, and Scandinavians are doing all right.

 

Quote:
No one ever thought we'd use our devices to watch Netflix, Hulu, HBO, or use it as a wifi hotspot.

 

The people who came up with the ideas for them did. The only problem lies in the fact that these people didn't work for the telecoms at the time.

 

Quote:
You can't compare Japan and the US without taking land mass and population into consideration.

 

I don't much see what population has to do with it, but size is, admittedly, a valid consideration.


Except when you take into account that we've blanketed the country three times over with more towers than we actually need since the companies can't agree on a format.

Originally Posted by Slurpy

There's just a TINY chance that Apple will also be able to figure out payments. Oh wait, they did already… …and you’re already f*ed.

 

Reply

Originally Posted by Slurpy

There's just a TINY chance that Apple will also be able to figure out payments. Oh wait, they did already… …and you’re already f*ed.

 

Reply
post #90 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by lilgto64 View Post

 

1.The difference is that Apple is making products that people are free to choose and willing to pay a premium for while cellular carriers are providing a service that people are forced to pay for in order to use those devices and those service providers believe that if they are not making a similar premium then they are losing money. 

 

2.Imagine buying a premium automobile and paying extra because you want the additional features/reliability/ease of use/etc only to discover that when you go to the gas station you get charged more per gallon than the economy car next to you - or the toll road owners complaining that they are unable to charge you more each time you use the toll road just because you use it more often than some other car. Or the toll road offering an unlimited pass and then complaining that usage of the roadway has increased to a point where they need to repair the roadway more often. 

 

3.Or perhaps this is in part a problem of consumers' perception - since I am choosing to buy a premium product (the iPhone) I accept having to pay a premium - but since I don't consider the cellular service a premium service (esp when there was no option) then I don;t think I should have to pay a premium for that service. 

1. You are free to use the iPod Touch. You are free to use a service provider that doesn't "screw" you like you don't want to be. You are pissing uphill, if you don't like it then don't use it. No one it forcing you to buy anything and if you want to pout, go pout to Apple. They are selling their wares to the "evil" corporation that you're "forced" to use. Aren't they a little responsible for the outcome?

 

2. You and every other person paints this horrible picture, but it doesn't exist (first sentence). Toll road owners complain all the time about not being able to raise charges! When they can't raise fast passes they raise individual gate fees. Do you own a car? Are you even an adult? The fact that you act like this doesn't happen means you must not own a car. Piss and moan all you want about having a "premium device" and all the "horrible" things that the carriers do to you. If you don't like it, don't buy it. How hard is that to understand?

 

3. Then quit whining about it and don't buy the service! 


Edited by HKZ - 5/5/12 at 11:01am
post #91 of 124

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

 

1.The Japanese, South Koreans, and Scandinavians are doing all right.

 

 

2.The people who came up with the ideas for them did. The only problem lies in the fact that these people didn't work for the telecoms at the time.

 

 

3.I don't much see what population has to do with it, but size is, admittedly, a valid consideration.


Except when you take into account that we've blanketed the country three times over with more towers than we actually need since the companies can't agree on a format.

 

1.You're comparing different land masses and population densities in Europe with the US? Really? Have you ever taken a geography class? Are you an elementary student? Crack open a world atlas at some point in your life. Everything isn't perfect over there either, Britain has it's own share of problems (which wasn't given as an example but it still valid). Doesn't help that the iPhone 4 has also had(s) serious flaws in the design that highlighted weak spots in the networks worldwide and not just AT&T. How did you become a moderator with that level of ignorance?

 

2. Your point? 60 million people hammering a network at once is just no big deal right? I don't want to sound like I'm defending AT&T but your argument and most others are of whiny children that want their data yesterday. I know AT&T has done a shitty job, I hate them more than most probably. But just because extremely population dense Japan does it has no bearing on what the US can do.

 

3. Population density. You're unbelievable. Size is "admittedly" a valid consideration? How do you survive being so clueless and wearing such awful blinders? Or is it just your usual act where you spread your awfulness across all Apple sites?


Edited by HKZ - 5/5/12 at 11:03am
post #92 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by HKZ View Post
1.You're comparing different land masses and population densities in Europe with the US. Everything isn't perfect over there either, Britain has it's own share of problems (which wasn't given as an example but it still valid).

 

So explain why, when this country is already covered with cell towers of different protocols and frequencies, we still have this problem.

 

Quote:
 Doesn't help that the iPhone 4 has also had(s) serious flaws in the design that highlighted weak spots in the networks worldwide and not just AT&T. How did you become a moderator with that level of ignorance?

 

Tim_Cook_beating_a_dead_horse_with_an_iPhone_4_for_a_head.png

 

Quote:

2. Your point? 60 million people hammering a network at once is just no big deal right? I don't want to sound like I'm defending AT&T but your argument and most others are of whiny children that want their data yesterday. I know AT&T has done a shitty job, I hate them more than most probably. But just because extremely population dense Japan does it has no bearing on what the US can do.

 

So the fact that Japan has more people in its cities and in a smaller amount of space and manages to deliver cellular data efficiently… excuses AT&T from doing the same with less population density in the US?

 

Quote:

3. Population density. You're unbelievable. Size is "admittedly" a valid consideration? How do you survive being so clueless and wearing such awful blinders? Or is it just your usual act where you spread your awfulness across all Apple sites?

 

"Usual act"? Hey, you wouldn't happen to have four Twitter accounts, would you? lol.gif

Originally Posted by Slurpy

There's just a TINY chance that Apple will also be able to figure out payments. Oh wait, they did already… …and you’re already f*ed.

 

Reply

Originally Posted by Slurpy

There's just a TINY chance that Apple will also be able to figure out payments. Oh wait, they did already… …and you’re already f*ed.

 

Reply
post #93 of 124
If you on IOS 5.01 or later, jailbreak, install MY3G or Facebreak from Cydia and facetime over 3G to your hearts content.... Also, Skype works over 3G without needing to JB.
post #94 of 124
Pathic revisionist history.

The iPhone with unlimited data was something that put AT&T back on the map.

They didn't invest in jobs. They invested in a product that they made bank on.

They want to limit customers? Those customers will go elsewhere.

Bottom line.

AT&T is the same company that lies about 4G.

Mobile data consumption doesn't cost AT&T.

They roll out the hardware and maintain the servers.

Once you know how the system works, you realize what a scam and a racket mobile data is.

You pay ridiculous fees with data limits for convenience. It's no more difficult than any other data bandwidth provider.

Throttling is also an issue. One could see throttling if someone was using 100 gn a month on a phone. But 2-3? Get real.

AT&T is digging it's own grave here.

Their problem is vision. Even U-Verse was an afterthought to FiOS. And just now they think about LTE?

The best move they made was the superior gsm/edge.

But they spent so much time milking that that they forgot to think about the next gen. Now they cry about it, blame their customers??? Blame a dead CEO??? No class.

Basically this is AT&T admitting to the public that they don't know what theyre doing and don't know how to say "thank you" for something that worked so well for them for so long.

Instead, they are preparing customers for a big "screw you... Now pay me for it"...

Vz is also notorious for following a trend that works well for AT&T. I can see them pulling this too.

Sprint is only silent because it's new.

It m be time for a new player.

We aren't talking an entrenched system of telephone wires. We are talking the purchase/ lease of land to plant towers and an electric bill /all connected to a server farm/farms.

It's time for some new blood in the industry.
post #95 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by HKZ View Post

1.You're comparing different land masses and population densities in Europe with the US? Really? Have you ever taken a geography class? Are you an elementary student? Crack open a world atlas at some point in your life. Everything isn't perfect over there either, Britain has it's own share of problems (which wasn't given as an example but it still valid). Doesn't help that the iPhone 4 has also had(s) serious flaws in the design that highlighted weak spots in the networks worldwide and not just AT&T. How did you become a moderator with that level of ignorance?

2. Your point? 60 million people hammering a network at once is just no big deal right? I don't want to sound like I'm defending AT&T but your argument and most others are of whiny children that want their data yesterday. I know AT&T has done a shitty job, I hate them more than most probably. But just because extremely population dense Japan does it has no bearing on what the US can do.

3. Population density. You're unbelievable. Size is "admittedly" a valid consideration? How do you survive being so clueless and wearing such awful blinders? Or is it just your usual act where you spread your awfulness across all Apple sites?


Ooop.

Someone's in a tizzy.

Don't like having AT&T stupidity exposed...

Wear a blue badge do you?
post #96 of 124
I cannot wait for iPhone on T-Mobile, officially -- then you MIGHT see AT&T finally get off their arse. lol not holding my breath, however.


Check this out, finally some relief in basic notification before huge overages -- what took them so long:
http://www.fcc.gov/encyclopedia/bill-shock-wireless-usage-alerts-consumers

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeremy C View Post

Mr. Stephenson shouldn't be lamenting the past and in fact should be looking into the future.  Blaming a device for a market shift is akin to throwing one's toys on the ground.  Yes, Apple was the first to bring that market shift and it did so in rapid terms but shame on you Mr. Stephenson for not recognizing it and coming to grips with the future of a wireless carrier.  Gather your toys, sit down with your CTO and understand what that future looks like and figure out what it will take to move towards that future business model.  Don't be like your legacy parent and cling to the old business model because all you're doing is leaving the door open for another carrier who 'gets it' to come in and steal your customers.
post #97 of 124
Radio spectrum should be managed by a private non-profit association, as the FCC is doing a terrible job of it!

Where is radio spectrum in the Constitution, the Federal Government has no business in the RF regulation activities, nor the FTC! Show me the law, it does not exist. Most of the things the gov't does it is not authorized to do. It is not Constitutional.


As for the fuel example, they company would not do that because it would not be good for business -- the market signals would tell them this is not smart, and they would relent, or people would simply buy elsewhere.
Quote:
Originally Posted by johndoe98 View Post

Both of you fail to appreciate that in order for telecoms to exist, they have to make use of the public airwaves. That spectrum is allotted to them under certain specific conditions. So no they cannot do anything they want even if they are a private company. They are regulated by the FTC and FCC.

Well, the FTC is governed by the Sherman Act, the FTC Act, and the Clayton Act. The FCC is primarily governed by the Communications Act.

Imagine for a second that Apple, Nokia, and Google's various Android phones all enabled tethering from their side by default on the handsets. Do you really think the telecoms can ban all these handsets from their network? No they couldn't. All they could do is stipulate in the contract that you are not allowed to make use of those features. If the user violates that contract they might get into trouble with their telecom, but the telecom can't say squat to the handset makers themselves. Of course, the reason why the feature isn't built in to the handset is because if it was the telecoms know full well that they wouldn't have a chance of enforcing that clause of their contract in a court. So rather than have to deal with that mess, they negotiate with the handset makers to have them keep certain features out.

To use an example similar to what you were using to another poster. Imagine that Shell, a private company, decided it didn't want to sell its fuel to new Japanese cars, as of 2012. Do you think it could do so? Every time an American car rolls up, it says no problem! Anytime an older Japanese car or German car pulls up, no problem. It sells the fuel. But when the 2012 Toyotas show up, it says, sorry, we are a private company and we do not sell our fuel to that model of car. Not going to happen. Imagine if the fuel company said, "sorry we don't sell fuel to hybrid cars because it messes with our revenue stream". Do you think that would fly?
post #98 of 124
I had a Nextel i90c phone before iPhone, and the ONLY reason I went to AT&T was iPhone.

Problem is, iPhone STILL has not Walkie Talkie style Direct Connect feature, and that BLOWS! The feature is EXTREMELY useful, and Apple needs to add a button on the side of the phone for this half-duplex audio!

Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post

I, and I'm sure a lot of other people, would not have switched to AT&T without the iPhone.  
post #99 of 124
The problem I have isn't pricing per se.after all u could view the iPhone as a 700-800 purchase with much lower monthly AT&T payments. Apple (rightly) set up this scheme to attract the most purchases. The problem I do have is the carriers continually advertising their newest and greatest pipes (4g for example) without adjusting the cost continually downward per data unit ( and all potentially upward per user) to reflect those advances...
post #100 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by libertyforall View Post

A cellular network is private, and they can allow whatever they choose on their private network. If you do not like that, you have the choice to choose a DIFFERENT private network.
There is no such thing as a public cellular network!

This is not true.  All networks are operated as public services.  The operator owns the equipment, but does not own the spectrum. The spectrum use is publicly controlled and regulated and it must be administered in the collective public good.

 

That the FCC has not tried to operate in a Public Utilities Commission manner when it comes to pricing is probably a temporary situation.

.
Reply
.
Reply
post #101 of 124

How about ATT giving us a credit for dropped calls on their network?

post #102 of 124

Oh, Boo-hoo!

 

Not everyone on AT&T has an unlimited data plan--perhaps not even a majority of smartphone users--and the new throttling practice forced down their throats will surely push many customers into a tiered plan.

 

I'd say the expensive attempt to merge with T-Mobile was truly boneheaded... and the crying over unlimited data plan customers is an intended distraction.


Edited by Cpsro - 5/6/12 at 1:15pm
post #103 of 124

Since I cried for three years in New York City about AT&T's lousy connectivity with my iPhone 3G, it's somewhat satisfying to have the CEO cry a little now too.

 

I can't imagine anyone in NYC going with AT&T. It's still the worst here. (In other places in the USA I've heard it's better.)

 

The migration of the New York multitudes to Verizon is what Stephenson should be crying about... and doing something about... by making the service better.

post #104 of 124

If only this man could build an illegal monopoly and more powerfully screw us.  It is really a shame because I was waiting for him.

post #105 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by frankie View Post

Uh, yes.

De-regulation is the cause of most of this country's problems.  We literally would not be in this mess were it not for de-regulation.

Over-regulation, specifically government intervention in markets where the weak players should have been wiped out (I'm looking at you, banking and financial sector and the auto industry) and been allowed to be sold off or shut down according to free market principles instead of tossing billions into dying industries is the problem. There is no shortage of regulation, friend.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #106 of 124

Ok, so here is the cellular providers' nightmare!  LMAO!

 

Qualcomm Snapdragon S4 MSM8960 mobile chip could put an end to metered cellular voice calls.

 

http://voxilla.com/2012/02/02/qualcomm-voip-chip-could-signal-the-end-of-metered-cell-calls/

post #107 of 124

There is no point in complaining about AT&T not thinking of their customers and treating them like the music or motion picture industry would.

All companies understand one, and in most cases only one language: money.

If you don't like what they're doing go give your money to someone else. It will work for you short term and if enough people vote this way they'll get it and change so you may come back some day.

If you put up with it and complain you'll only get more abuse, because then they'll know you don't actually care.

post #108 of 124

Forgot to mention an actual example:

Some months ago I started wondering why the VoIP calls I sometimes make from my iPhone on my current carrier here were less reliable than I remembered them. Two weeks ago I read a lovely press release from my carrier about how they were adding innovative value for their customers with their new VoIP plan for just 6€ a month. I said "uhm, wait".

And indeed I found another press release from the start of the year that they had bought a lovely new filtering software to help block and obstruct VoIP traffic on their network. I also found a lovely no-voip-clause had been added to the conditions of the monthly data package. So it turns out they decided to strip VoIP use from the data plan (without lowering the price, of course) and then allow you to add it back in for an extra 6€ a month.

I won't send them any angry emails or call them. 

Instead I've requested carrier portability and tomorrow my number will switch over to another carrier which explicitly allows VoIP traffic and that's the end of the story.

post #109 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by HKZ View Post

Google Voice is a free app that allows free calls over data networks. Does it really need any more explaining than that?

To the cellular telcos, the baseline implementation of Google Voice as implemented on the iPhone as an App does not involve transferring any voice calls over the data component of a cellular network.

All of the actual voice information entering and exiting the cell phone for both incoming an outgoing calls are carried through normal cellular voice channels, eating up normal local voice minutes which are billed by the celular telcos accordingly.

On the outgoing side, such a system does, indeed, deny the telos the oportunity to charge extra for long distance routing - but even if the App were actually blocked from running on the cell phone, the core functionality of routing the long distance calls through a 3rd paty carrier through a proxy phone numbe would still have been accessible - the basic business model has existed in the form of 3rd party long distance calling cards for many years. The difference with Google Voice is that the routing (not the call itself) is configured using interactive web services (GV) rather than voice prompts during the call itself (long distance calling cards).

On the incoming side, the system is really immaterial, because the vast majority of incoming calls are charged at the local rate - if they are charged at all - no matter where the customer is within their native calling area. And as soon as they leave their native calling area, the customer will still continue to be charged a premium rate to receive incoming Google Voice calls whlst roaming on a foreign carrier.

Indeed, since Google Voice uses the Internet and VoIP to carry calls from the outgoing local access number to the incoming local access number, the ISPs who provide Google with wired connections to the internet backbone might potentially have a bone to pick with Google's usage of their bandwidth -- but for the wireless servce providers, these issues ought to be immaterial.
post #110 of 124

My AT&T cell phone bill, with "fees" and taxes is just under $1000 per year.    The lifetime value to a phone company of a single customer at that rate is over $30,000 per customer.     Why do you think they're so anxious to give away phones for family members if you get extra lines?   A family with three cell phones and three cell phone lines can easily have a lifetime value of $90,000.     How piggy does AT&T (or any phone company for that matter) have to be?   Yes, they have capital costs, but to paraphrase from "The Godfather", "that's the business they chose to be in."    

 

Personally, I feel my cell phone bill, even though I'm grandfathered with unlimited data use, is outrageously high.

 

My cable bill (cable TV + web cable modem)  is only about 20% higher than my cell phone bill and as much as we all hate our cable suppliers, they have to buy tons of rights to content.  They generally have to pay by the channel and frequently by the subscriber, even for subscribers who don't watch a particular channel.     And they certainly have infrastructure costs with having to wire the streets and homes.

 

I cry no tears for AT&T.     And this CEO was an idiot for publicly taking that position.    

post #111 of 124
You are a cry baby Randall Stephenson. Perhaps you should have let Apple go with Sprint as the first carrier with the iPhone. This is so ungrateful of you. Don't you have enought being a millionaire?
You have to start looking at the future and look for ways of innovating your service (like Steve Jobs innovated), instead of trying to stay in the past and relying on an old business model. Don't you remember what happened when millions of people didn't need land lines in their homes anymore? They canceled them and just kept their cellphones. I am one of them. Learn from that: we can't pretend to stay for so many years relying on the same kind of technology because technology always moves forward. Don't you think that cloud services are more than enought for storing SMS and MMS activity. Carrier's SMS and MMS services might be a thing of the past on the future. Imagine that and plan ahead. Also, we can't pretend to stay for so many years relying on the same kind of business models. Innovate, bring new services to customers, innovate on customer support.
One more thing: stop blaming others for your business decisions. Take responsibility for your actions and don't make us, your customers, pay more on our bills because of your 'mistakes'.
post #112 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by 9secondko View Post


Ooop.
Someone's in a tizzy.
Don't like having AT&T stupidity exposed...
Wear a blue badge do you?

 

Trust me, no ones hatred of AT&T surpasses mine. I suffered through two years of outright criminal service problems that they ignored every time I brought it up. Their lies kept me and I even upgraded (stupidly in hindsight) to the iPhone 4 because they swore they were bringing 3G service to my area. Call me crazy but I measured where it stopped and EDGE was available and their 3g "expansion" ended almost exactly 1/4 of a mile from my front door. I hate them more than anything in the world. They aren't above vicious ridicule and insults, but some things they are lacking on isn't as easy as everyone thinks. They do have legitimate problems and I don't fault them for what they can't fix overnight. AT&T is borderline criminal for how they treat people but they've had one hell of a time making their network upgrades in a timely manner and internet outrage over problems hits an unnecessary fever pitch sometime. Their network is crap in the cast majority of the US, but fixing it isn't as simple as just buying the boxes and plugging them in. If it were we'd have a lot more choice on carriers. (Corporate politics and lobbying aside of course.) Their plans and charges aren't up for debate, they suck and I agree 100% that they are evil in what they do.

post #113 of 124

It is essential that apple customers militate to have these devices (iphone, ipad) be configured by the manufacturer to be sold to function on a wide range of wifi and cellular networks with the in built hardware and software.  That way the owner is empowered to use them as they best see fit independent of cell phone protocol of a given carrier or country.

 

Universal iphone and ipad accomplishes this.  Customer willingness to buy or fiance unlocked phone purchase so carrier isn't subsidizing purchase helps even further.  When we value the device for something closer to what it is worth and simply look to carrier to provide (some) connectivity, then we will have our natural consumer authority back.

 

American cell customers addiction to cell phone and tablet subsidies is what creates this unholy situation resulting in the cell phone carrier feeling a false sense of entitlement to device owner's ongoing business despite provision of low grade product both technically and in terms of customer service.  iphone and ipad owners of course will and should utilize their system on multiple networks as their requirements and location (network availability) dictate.

 

The universal iphone and ipad with identical hardware and software throughout the world solves the problem.  Then and only then will cell customers be able to have a reasonable push back against carriers when they feel the quality or value associated w what the the carrier offers doesn't meet customer's expectations.

 

Everyone, please tell Apple that is what you want and expect. If they deliver it as seems they might, then some of us have to pay full price for our handset and tablets so we are independent of contract from day 1.  Only when that group of subscribers becomes significant will rate plans change to reflect a fair notion of value.

 

Also of course, it would be nice if customers not benefiting from a subsidy the carrier is still trying to recover benefited from lower rates than customers who are still "paying back" the subsidy they received in full on day 1 on which they took delivery of their device.

 

In the meantime, every time you speak or interact with AT&T (or Verizon) make it clear the future of your business is at stake.

 

What do you all think?
 

post #114 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by ATT Detractor View Post
The universal iphone and ipad with identical hardware and software throughout the world solves the problem.  Then and only then will cell customers be able to have a reasonable push back against carriers when they feel the quality or value associated w what the the carrier offers doesn't meet customer's expectations.

 

Nope. Even with a fully-compatible worldwide device, we'll still be forced to buy data plans in the US even if we don't want them.

Originally Posted by Slurpy

There's just a TINY chance that Apple will also be able to figure out payments. Oh wait, they did already… …and you’re already f*ed.

 

Reply

Originally Posted by Slurpy

There's just a TINY chance that Apple will also be able to figure out payments. Oh wait, they did already… …and you’re already f*ed.

 

Reply
post #115 of 124

The point isn't merely that you may still (always) need a data plan.  The point is that w/o a contract and with a universal phone you are free to explore alternatives w/o the current limitations that usually apply.

 

Would you quickly return to a restaurant that gave your spouse food poisoning when you were celebrating their bday?  No you might seek out alternatives which if they pleased you more in terms of quality, value or convenience would supplant the original restaurant that served the toxic bday fare.

 

If it were easy to abandon your cell phone carrier, the carriers would get a lot better quickly.  I feel certain.

 

 

A universal unlocked handset free of contract from day one online by high value subscribers in significant numbers would be one way to test the proposition.

post #116 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by ATT Detractor View Post
The point isn't merely that you may still (always) need a data plan.  The point is that w/o a contract and with a universal phone you are free to explore alternatives w/o the current limitations that usually apply.

 

Okay. And even with a fully unlocked universal phone, we'll still be forced to buy a contract in the US.

Originally Posted by Slurpy

There's just a TINY chance that Apple will also be able to figure out payments. Oh wait, they did already… …and you’re already f*ed.

 

Reply

Originally Posted by Slurpy

There's just a TINY chance that Apple will also be able to figure out payments. Oh wait, they did already… …and you’re already f*ed.

 

Reply
post #117 of 124

If the owner of a handset or tablet configured by manufacturer to work on all or most cellular networks in the world would like to pay for the privilege of connecting to a US carrier's network, there will be ways to do that w/o contract.

 

Such customers would be somewhat rare by comparison w today's status quo in that:

 

1.  This type of customer would not be requesting or receiving a subsidy of their handset

 

2.  Their handset was configured by the manufacturer to work on CDMA and GSM and all iterations of 3G and 4G.  (as everyone knows, there is precedent for this w wifi apple products are compatible w 802.11 B/G/N protocols and one can assume the upcoming 802.11 ac.)

 

3.  By virtue of 1 and 2, this category of customer would be free to leave a carrier and become a customer of an alternative carrier because they were dis-satisfied w the technical quality, customer service or value of their current carrier's offering or simply because they had relocated to another part of the country or the world.

 

There are month to month plans now.  The main selling point of the country and justification for it is the subsidy of the initial handset at beginning of the term of the contract.  Take that out of the equation, there is no reason for a contract whatsoever.

 

With old but still useful smart phones which are "out of contract" being widely available, this category of customer will become very large very fast.  (Of course, old handsets are not currently that close to universal.)

 

Question is will customers buy their handset at the full unsubsidized price in order to regain their flexibility to leave an unsatisfactory service provider and to favorably adjust the power equation with their cell network.

 

Does everyone agree w Tallest skil that nothing can be done by customers, manufacaturers, or the market to increase the relative strength handset and tablet users enjoy vis a vis the telco giants?

post #118 of 124

You can't use an iPhone on any US carrier without a data plan and a contract. It simply isn't possible. Those that have managed to get it working before had to so a lot of legwork and pay bit by bit and those loopholes are rapidly closing. It simply isn't possible to have a smartphone like the iPhone without something you don't want, a data plan, or without signing a contract. It's a bunch of BS, but that's where we are. I think phone service should be like gasoline. Buy the car, use whatever brand of gas you want in it, from wherever you can buy it. Doesn't work that way, but I wish it did.

post #119 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by HKZ View Post
You can't use an iPhone on any US carrier without a data plan and a contract. It simply isn't possible.

 

Sure, you keep thinking that.

 

Quote:
Those that have managed to get it working before had to so a lot of legwork and pay bit by bit and those loopholes are rapidly closing.


Or they just took their iPhone to their carrier, got a SIM, and walked out.

 

Quote:
It simply isn't possible to have a smartphone like the iPhone without… …signing a contract.

 

Nope. Possible.

Originally Posted by Slurpy

There's just a TINY chance that Apple will also be able to figure out payments. Oh wait, they did already… …and you’re already f*ed.

 

Reply

Originally Posted by Slurpy

There's just a TINY chance that Apple will also be able to figure out payments. Oh wait, they did already… …and you’re already f*ed.

 

Reply
post #120 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Sure, you keep thinking that.



Or they just took their iPhone to their carrier, got a SIM, and walked out.


Nope. Possible.

How? Which carrier?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › AT&T CEO bemoans iPhone unlimited data, iMessage