So let me get this straight? You are complaining because AT&T will acknowledge their service sucks in your area and let you out of your contract, is that really something to complain about?
The rest of what you said adds nothing to the quality of our civil dialogue.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacRR
And I roll my eyes when supposed uber techs pontificate about how complex their job is and what a big deal it is.
Then answer me this wonderboy- How come in the flattest swath of SF in a neighborhood called the mission there is shot for coverage? How come AT&T will acknowledge that fact and let you out of an early termination fee?
Stop talking like a douche and get to work, tool.
Oh and btw... "private citizens"? Are you in the military? no.. you're an engineer. moron. Let me clue you into a fact- you're a private citizen too.
From what I've read the problem was that Cingular's old analog TDMA network was sitting on the 850Mhz spectrum. AT&T was trying to push customer off of it onto GSM before they could shut it down. AT&T sent letters to TDMA customers who would not switch warning them that their phone service was going to be discontinued. Apparently there were some number of people who never heed the warning and AT&T was forced to shut it down. That is what held up the 850Mhz transition.
Then answer me this wonderboy- How come in the flattest swath of SF in a neighborhood called the mission there is shot for coverage? How come AT&T will acknowledge that fact and let you out of an early termination fee?
Stop talking like a douche and get to work, tool.
In the comment he was commending your query was likely answered.
Quote:
4) More cell towers - This is the hard part. There are all kinds of license, zoning and other costs associate with the towers. Even switching an existing tower over can be a legal/political quagmire.
You state that AT&T understands the problem, lets people out of contracts early and sends them off to other carriers for service. This certainly sounds like they have their hands tied at the moment with coverage in that area.
Too little too late. AT&T sat on their asses while Verizon got their shit together.
Relatively speaking, it would seem Verizon sat on its @ss, because it didn't have (or want) the iPhone and therefore didn't need to support much 3G usage in any given area. Kinda makes it easier to roll out 3G to a wider area, if there isn't so much usage anywhere.
You claimed it was the delayed shutdown of the 850MHz analog/TDMA that slowed the transition for its use for 3G. But the shutdown was not delayed. It was planned since 2006 for shutdown in Feb 2008. And Feb 2008 is almost 2 years ago.
Although seriously, you don't have to give him that kind of attitude, and if he is an engineer, perhaps he does have a better idea of what goes on. There's no reason for disrespect.
Relatively speaking, it would seem Verizon sat on its @ss, because it didn't have (or want) the iPhone and therefore didn't need to support much 3G usage in any given area. Kinda makes it easier to roll out 3G to a wider area, if there isn't so much usage anywhere.
A.T.&T. put out a press release over the summer that they upgraded their 3G network in New York City.There must be another New York City somewhere. I probably use about 1/3 of a full battery charge just waiting for things to happen on the 3G network.
I cannot find it now. But there was an article from 2007 when the iPhone was first released and there was all the talk about AT&T's lack of 3G coverage. AT&T said at the time that it wanted to shut down its TDMA network as soon as it could but there was a small number of people who continued to use it and delayed shutting it down. The Feb 2008 deadline was the final deadline.
Even after AT&T shut down TDMA it could not just instantly turn on 3G. It has to upgrade equipment and software for hundreds of towers and switching stations.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ski1
You claimed it was the delayed shutdown of the 850MHz analog TDMA that slowed the transition for its use for 3G. But the shutdown was not delayed. It was planned since 2006 for shutdown in Feb 2008. And Feb 2008 is almost 2 years ago.
That's what happens when you have 30 iPhones trying to download data from the same tower. There is only so much AT&T can do about that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Runner9
A.T.&T. put out a press release over the summer that they upgraded their 3G network in New York City.There must be another New York City somewhere. I probably use about 1/3 of a full battery charge just waiting for things to happen on the 3G network.
You claimed it was the delayed shutdown of the 850MHz analog TDMA that slowed the transition for its use for 3G. But the shutdown was not delayed. It was planned since 2006 for shutdown in Feb 2008. And Feb 2008 is almost 2 years ago.
He didn?t say it was delayed. it could very well have been taken down on the schedule they set. That doesn?t mean their imposed deadllne on the 850MHz weren?t holding up their ability to start using the spectrum in a new way.
I cannot find it now. But there was an article from 2007 when the iPhone was first released and there was all the talk about AT&T's lack of 3G coverage. AT&T said at the time that it wanted to shut down its TDMA network as soon as it could but there was a small number of people who continued to use it and delayed shutting it down. The Feb 2008 deadline was the final deadline.
Even after AT&T shut down TDMA it could not just instantly turn on 3G. It has to upgrade equipment and software for hundreds of towers and switching stations.
The article I linked in my previous post states the Feb 2008 deadline was planned since 2006. Feb 2008 was also when Verizon shut down their Analog network. But yet Verizon was able to expand their 3G network a lot faster then AT&T.
AT&T could have said February 2008 is the final deadline for the shut down of our TDMA network. AT&T was sending letters out to people letting them know it would be shut down two years prior, AT&T hoped to shut it down sooner if they could get everyone off of it sooner. A number of people stayed on TDMA up until the final imposed deadline.
Yes we all know Verizon did a better job at executing its 3G roll out.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ski1
The article I linked in my previous post states the Feb 2008 deadline was planned since 2006. Feb 2008 was also when Verizon shut down their Analog network. But yet Verizon was able to expand their 3G network a lot faster then AT&T.
AT&T could have said February 2008 is the final deadline for the shut down of our TDMA network. AT&T was sending letters out to people letting them know it would be shut down two years prior, AT&T hoped to shut it down sooner if they could get everyone off of it sooner. A number of people stayed on TDMA up until the final imposed deadline.
Yes we all know Verizon did a better job at executing its 3G roll out.
AT&T or Verizon could not shut off analog off any sooner. There was no hoping involved to shut it down sooner. The FCC required them to keep analog active until Feb 18, 2008. And this rule was put in place in 2002.
That's not entirely true as in AT&T's press release it says AT&T began shutting down TDMA in some states before the Feb 2008 deadline. I'm sure there was a rule in the fine print that if analog usage has fallen to a certain level the carrier could turn it off before Feb 2008. But on the Feb 2008 deadline they were free to turn it off regardless of how many people were using it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ski1
AT&T or Verizon could not shut off analog off any sooner. There was no hoping involved to shut it down sooner. The FCC required them to keep analog active until Feb 18, 2008.
I roll my eyes when I hear the ignorant fools here...
For you who are quick to point out me slamming this guy...
he's calling his customer base ignorant fools. AT&T has had years to step up, and SF is very small as far as urban areas go. His pontificating post is just so lame he deserves to get knocked down a rung. I mean puhlease.. we're all private citizens. what a joke. this guy lives in some kind of fantasy land.. and if this is the attitude of the engineers.. no wonder here we are three years later with the same shit service in the same small area.
I don't give AT&T a pass at this point- and only a patsy would.
secondly- yes. I can get out of AT&T .. but I do like the iPhone. so where does that leave me? don;t act like that's such an awe inspiring scenario.
I have a buddy looking into unlocking and moving to T mobile.. but I will make my decision based on his experience.. he's always right on with his take on this kind of stuff.
That's not entirely true as in AT&T's press release it says AT&T began shutting down TDMA in some states before the Feb 2008 deadline. I imagine those were areas where TDMA use was either nonexistent or so low as to not matter.
Shutting down TDMA is different then shutting down analog. TDMA is digital. Analog was still active until Feb 2008.
For you who are quick to point out me slamming this guy...
he's calling his customer base ignorant fools. AT&T has had years to step up, and SF is very small as far as urban areas go. His pontificating post is just so lame he deserves to get knocked down a rung. I mean puhlease.. we're all private citizens. what a joke. this guy lives in some kind of fantasy land.. and if this is the attitude of the engineers.. no wonder here we are three years later with the same shit service in the same small area.
I don't give AT&T a pass at this point- and only a patsy would.
secondly- yes. I can get out of AT&T .. but I do like the iPhone. so where does that leave me? don;t act like that's such an awe inspiring scenario.
I have a buddy looking into unlocking and moving to T mobile.. but I will make my decision based on his experience.. he's always right on with his take on this kind of stuff.
No, you're the one being lame here.
I've listened to a few of these cell phone tower hearings, and compared to many of the 'private citizens' you are an uber tech. And the politicians and so called subject subject experts are not much better. Anything and everything is complained about, bitched about and just plain confused that it is a wonder that anything gets approved. And believe it or not, most of the complaints are about seeing the towers.That's why towers are being hid as fake trees, in fake buildings and even hid over the ridges of mountains. Just so they can't be seen.
The article I linked in my previous post states the Feb 2008 deadline was planned since 2006. Feb 2008 was also when Verizon shut down their Analog network. But yet Verizon was able to expand their 3G network a lot faster then AT&T.
Compared to AT&T, how much traffic does Verizon really have on its 3G network?
I believe Congress mandated analog support until Feb. 2008. The carriers would have dumped it sooner, if they had been allowed.
I've listened to a few of these cell phone tower hearings, and compared to many of the 'private citizens' you are an uber tech. And the politicians and so called subject subject experts are not much better. Anything and everything is complained about, bitched about and just plain confused that it is a wonder that anything gets approved. And believe it or not, most of the complaints are about seeing the towers.That's why towers are being hid as fake trees, in fake buildings and even hid over the ridges of mountains. Just so they can't be seen.
and so you live in SF?
please tell me- in at least some detail- what meetings and with whom was running/attending such hearings? What neighborhood was the tower(s) in question that would cover the mission- btw that has fine coverage from other companies.
otherwise- i call BS- which would make you pretty lame. Because I think you're making this up when it comes to SF.
Comments
The rest of what you said adds nothing to the quality of our civil dialogue.
And I roll my eyes when supposed uber techs pontificate about how complex their job is and what a big deal it is.
Then answer me this wonderboy- How come in the flattest swath of SF in a neighborhood called the mission there is shot for coverage? How come AT&T will acknowledge that fact and let you out of an early termination fee?
Stop talking like a douche and get to work, tool.
Oh and btw... "private citizens"? Are you in the military? no.. you're an engineer. moron. Let me clue you into a fact- you're a private citizen too.
From what I've read the problem was that Cingular's old analog TDMA network was sitting on the 850Mhz spectrum. AT&T was trying to push customer off of it onto GSM before they could shut it down. AT&T sent letters to TDMA customers who would not switch warning them that their phone service was going to be discontinued. Apparently there were some number of people who never heed the warning and AT&T was forced to shut it down. That is what held up the 850Mhz transition.
AT&T analog & TDMA was shutoff in Feb 2008.
http://www.wireless.att.com/learn/ar...tification.jsp
Then answer me this wonderboy- How come in the flattest swath of SF in a neighborhood called the mission there is shot for coverage? How come AT&T will acknowledge that fact and let you out of an early termination fee?
Stop talking like a douche and get to work, tool.
In the comment he was commending your query was likely answered.
4) More cell towers - This is the hard part. There are all kinds of license, zoning and other costs associate with the towers. Even switching an existing tower over can be a legal/political quagmire.
You state that AT&T understands the problem, lets people out of contracts early and sends them off to other carriers for service. This certainly sounds like they have their hands tied at the moment with coverage in that area.
AT&T analog TDMA was shutoff in Feb 2008.
Too little too late. AT&T sat on their asses while Verizon got their shit together.
Relatively speaking, it would seem Verizon sat on its @ss, because it didn't have (or want) the iPhone and therefore didn't need to support much 3G usage in any given area. Kinda makes it easier to roll out 3G to a wider area, if there isn't so much usage anywhere.
Yes I know, what is your point?
You claimed it was the delayed shutdown of the 850MHz analog/TDMA that slowed the transition for its use for 3G. But the shutdown was not delayed. It was planned since 2006 for shutdown in Feb 2008. And Feb 2008 is almost 2 years ago.
? no.. you're an engineer. moron.
Sorry, found that funny.
Although seriously, you don't have to give him that kind of attitude, and if he is an engineer, perhaps he does have a better idea of what goes on. There's no reason for disrespect.
Relatively speaking, it would seem Verizon sat on its @ss, because it didn't have (or want) the iPhone and therefore didn't need to support much 3G usage in any given area. Kinda makes it easier to roll out 3G to a wider area, if there isn't so much usage anywhere.
A.T.&T. put out a press release over the summer that they upgraded their 3G network in New York City.There must be another New York City somewhere. I probably use about 1/3 of a full battery charge just waiting for things to happen on the 3G network.
Even after AT&T shut down TDMA it could not just instantly turn on 3G. It has to upgrade equipment and software for hundreds of towers and switching stations.
You claimed it was the delayed shutdown of the 850MHz analog TDMA that slowed the transition for its use for 3G. But the shutdown was not delayed. It was planned since 2006 for shutdown in Feb 2008. And Feb 2008 is almost 2 years ago.
A.T.&T. put out a press release over the summer that they upgraded their 3G network in New York City.There must be another New York City somewhere. I probably use about 1/3 of a full battery charge just waiting for things to happen on the 3G network.
You claimed it was the delayed shutdown of the 850MHz analog TDMA that slowed the transition for its use for 3G. But the shutdown was not delayed. It was planned since 2006 for shutdown in Feb 2008. And Feb 2008 is almost 2 years ago.
He didn?t say it was delayed. it could very well have been taken down on the schedule they set. That doesn?t mean their imposed deadllne on the 850MHz weren?t holding up their ability to start using the spectrum in a new way.
I cannot find it now. But there was an article from 2007 when the iPhone was first released and there was all the talk about AT&T's lack of 3G coverage. AT&T said at the time that it wanted to shut down its TDMA network as soon as it could but there was a small number of people who continued to use it and delayed shutting it down. The Feb 2008 deadline was the final deadline.
Even after AT&T shut down TDMA it could not just instantly turn on 3G. It has to upgrade equipment and software for hundreds of towers and switching stations.
The article I linked in my previous post states the Feb 2008 deadline was planned since 2006. Feb 2008 was also when Verizon shut down their Analog network. But yet Verizon was able to expand their 3G network a lot faster then AT&T.
AT&T could have said February 2008 is the final deadline for the shut down of our TDMA network. AT&T was sending letters out to people letting them know it would be shut down two years prior, AT&T hoped to shut it down sooner if they could get everyone off of it sooner. A number of people stayed on TDMA up until the final imposed deadline.
Yes we all know Verizon did a better job at executing its 3G roll out.
The article I linked in my previous post states the Feb 2008 deadline was planned since 2006. Feb 2008 was also when Verizon shut down their Analog network. But yet Verizon was able to expand their 3G network a lot faster then AT&T.
Just bear with me.
AT&T could have said February 2008 is the final deadline for the shut down of our TDMA network. AT&T was sending letters out to people letting them know it would be shut down two years prior, AT&T hoped to shut it down sooner if they could get everyone off of it sooner. A number of people stayed on TDMA up until the final imposed deadline.
Yes we all know Verizon did a better job at executing its 3G roll out.
AT&T or Verizon could not shut off analog off any sooner. There was no hoping involved to shut it down sooner. The FCC required them to keep analog active until Feb 18, 2008. And this rule was put in place in 2002.
http://wireless.fcc.gov/services/ind...me&id=cellular
AT&T or Verizon could not shut off analog off any sooner. There was no hoping involved to shut it down sooner. The FCC required them to keep analog active until Feb 18, 2008.
http://wireless.fcc.gov/services/ind...me&id=cellular
I roll my eyes when I hear the ignorant fools here...
For you who are quick to point out me slamming this guy...
he's calling his customer base ignorant fools. AT&T has had years to step up, and SF is very small as far as urban areas go. His pontificating post is just so lame he deserves to get knocked down a rung. I mean puhlease.. we're all private citizens. what a joke. this guy lives in some kind of fantasy land.. and if this is the attitude of the engineers.. no wonder here we are three years later with the same shit service in the same small area.
I don't give AT&T a pass at this point- and only a patsy would.
secondly- yes. I can get out of AT&T .. but I do like the iPhone. so where does that leave me? don;t act like that's such an awe inspiring scenario.
I have a buddy looking into unlocking and moving to T mobile.. but I will make my decision based on his experience.. he's always right on with his take on this kind of stuff.
That's not entirely true as in AT&T's press release it says AT&T began shutting down TDMA in some states before the Feb 2008 deadline. I imagine those were areas where TDMA use was either nonexistent or so low as to not matter.
Shutting down TDMA is different then shutting down analog. TDMA is digital. Analog was still active until Feb 2008.
For you who are quick to point out me slamming this guy...
he's calling his customer base ignorant fools. AT&T has had years to step up, and SF is very small as far as urban areas go. His pontificating post is just so lame he deserves to get knocked down a rung. I mean puhlease.. we're all private citizens. what a joke. this guy lives in some kind of fantasy land.. and if this is the attitude of the engineers.. no wonder here we are three years later with the same shit service in the same small area.
I don't give AT&T a pass at this point- and only a patsy would.
secondly- yes. I can get out of AT&T .. but I do like the iPhone. so where does that leave me? don;t act like that's such an awe inspiring scenario.
I have a buddy looking into unlocking and moving to T mobile.. but I will make my decision based on his experience.. he's always right on with his take on this kind of stuff.
No, you're the one being lame here.
I've listened to a few of these cell phone tower hearings, and compared to many of the 'private citizens' you are an uber tech. And the politicians and so called subject subject experts are not much better. Anything and everything is complained about, bitched about and just plain confused that it is a wonder that anything gets approved. And believe it or not, most of the complaints are about seeing the towers.That's why towers are being hid as fake trees, in fake buildings and even hid over the ridges of mountains. Just so they can't be seen.
The article I linked in my previous post states the Feb 2008 deadline was planned since 2006. Feb 2008 was also when Verizon shut down their Analog network. But yet Verizon was able to expand their 3G network a lot faster then AT&T.
Compared to AT&T, how much traffic does Verizon really have on its 3G network?
I believe Congress mandated analog support until Feb. 2008. The carriers would have dumped it sooner, if they had been allowed.
No, you're the one being lame here.
I've listened to a few of these cell phone tower hearings, and compared to many of the 'private citizens' you are an uber tech. And the politicians and so called subject subject experts are not much better. Anything and everything is complained about, bitched about and just plain confused that it is a wonder that anything gets approved. And believe it or not, most of the complaints are about seeing the towers.That's why towers are being hid as fake trees, in fake buildings and even hid over the ridges of mountains. Just so they can't be seen.
and so you live in SF?
please tell me- in at least some detail- what meetings and with whom was running/attending such hearings? What neighborhood was the tower(s) in question that would cover the mission- btw that has fine coverage from other companies.
otherwise- i call BS- which would make you pretty lame. Because I think you're making this up when it comes to SF.