They're just getting a free ride off of Apple. I still can't complete a phone call without it dropping.
I have been a Cingular/ATT customer for years & have very few problems-certainly no more than people I know with other carriers. Do we expect too much???
Did AT&T report what percentage of their new subscribers came over for the iPhone? They better have a good trick planned for when the iPhone goes to other US carriers.
That state in the article...
"Quarterly iPhone 3G activations totaled over 1.6*million, down from 1.9 million during the December quarter, though more than 40*percent of those activations continue to come from customers who were new to AT&T."
That means that 640k are new to AT&T for the iPhone.
Quote:
Real question: What was the last device that drove people to switch carriers in such large numbers? Apple should have some powerful leverage with AT&T.
The last device was the original iPhone. Seriously, I don't think there is one because the exclusivity contracts between handset vendor and carrier have never last long enough for this kind of migration to occur. They only seem to last a few months which will get a few people who really want the new device, but at 3 months it would target 1/8th of the people who were under contract at the time of launch, and if they knew that a device was going to come to their carrier they may have just waited. This is a new thing. People have traditionally left a carrier because they were unhappy with a carrier, now they may be willing to leave a carrier that they kind of like for one that they didn't like in the past. I know I did this from T-Mobile to AT&T with the original iPhone vowing to never go back to Cingular. I found that the coverage was good and service was great. I have a feeling that my issues with Cingular may be mostly rooted in the frustration of the phones I had at the time.
"Quarterly iPhone 3G activations totaled over 1.6*million, down from 1.9 million during the December quarter, though more than 40*percent of those activations continue to come from customers who were new to AT&T."
That means that 640k are new to AT&T for the iPhone.
He didn't mean that. He was asking what percentage of their new subscribers came from the iPhone, not what percentage of iPhone customers were new subscribers.
Surely you must be lying. All I hear on these boards is how much AT&T still sucks in NYC.
I was in the City last weekend and I had full bars on 3G the whole time. Even had good coverage in buildings. Is there any way of knowing if they moved to 850MHz?
He didn't mean that. He was asking what percentage of their new subscribers came from the iPhone, not what percentage of iPhone customers were new subscribers.
Besides that- no static? from from either end? No distortion? My poor friend in Brooklyn - every other call he makes to me - he either has to call again or it's staticy.
Surely you must be lying. All I hear on these boards is how much AT&T still sucks in NYC.
I was in the City last weekend and I had full bars on 3G the whole time. Even had good coverage in buildings. Is there any way of knowing if they moved to 850MHz?
I'm assuming they have, at least in a number of places.
Even when the towers were spewing out on 1900, while I had poor speeds, I only had the one drop. When it suddenly improved markedly, several months ago, everything has been running pretty smoothly.
In Manhattan, people using all services have been telling me about problems. those huge building with their massive steel frames are going to be a problem in parts of Manhattan for years to come.
I had the poorest service in my home in Forest Hills, Queens. My house was built in 1925, with heavy mortar and plaster interior walls and ceilings, using a heavy steel mesh over wood lath to hold the material. This is NOT condusive to good signal reception! The windows help, but problems have occurred. But once service improved, it stopped being a problem.
Surely you must be lying. All I hear on these boards is how much AT&T still sucks in NYC.
I was in the City last weekend and I had full bars on 3G the whole time. Even had good coverage in buildings. Is there any way of knowing if they moved to 850MHz?
It's not only on these boards but it's been reported by the press for months.
I guess everyone is lying about AT&T and not only in NYC.
And it's not just an iPhone problem. AT&T (the patch network) is poor in general.
I'm assuming they have, at least in a number of places.
Even when the towers were spewing out on 1900, while I had poor speeds, I only had the one drop. When it suddenly improved markedly, several months ago, everything has been running pretty smoothly.
In Manhattan, people using all services have been telling me about problems. those huge building with their massive steel frames are going to be a problem in parts of Manhattan for years to come.
I had the poorest service in my home in Forest Hills, Queens. My house was built in 1925, with heavy mortar and plaster interior walls and ceilings, using a heavy steel mesh over wood lath to hold the material. This is NOT condusive to good signal reception! The windows help, but problems have occurred. But once service improved, it stopped being a problem.
Right- and the NY TImes and WSJ have been lying as well to sabotage the iPhone.
Besides that- no static? from from either end? No distortion? My poor friend in Brooklyn - every other call he makes to me - he either has to call again or it's staticy.
I've had noisy calls from every cellphone I've ever made calls from, no matter what network I've been using. So has everyone else I know.
I can't even attribute static to my side of the call any more than to the other end.
Sometimes the call is perfect, and sometimes not.
I can say that GSM is known for poorer call quality than calls from CDMA. This is old news. I never expected GSM to be as good, and it isn't. The same holds true for calls made on T-Mobile from my experience.
In fact, people I know who have Sprint or Verizon here, tell me that call quality in Europe is poorer there. GSM again.
GSM call quality has an artificial sound to it that CDMA calls don't seem to share.
Surely you must be lying. All I hear on these boards is how much AT&T still sucks in NYC.
I was in the City last weekend and I had full bars on 3G the whole time. Even had good coverage in buildings. Is there any way of knowing if they moved to 850MHz?
Like some of the guys here who don't even have a phone.
Right- and the NY TImes and WSJ have been lying as well to sabotage the iPhone.
I subscribe to both, and have read all those articles.
The fact is that I have had no real problems. That's also a fact. All the people here who say they've had no, or few problems should be believed as well. no reason to lie about it. You know me better than that.
Again, I ascribe the poorer quality of calls to GSM. My Sprint calls were more natural sounding, with less electronic buss and echo. Both of those problems are GSM problems. The iPhone itself may not have the best call quality either, from what I read.
But that's separate from dropped calls. Moving to 850 MHZ seems to help there.
Its interesting being someone who does not even use AT&T or the iPhone you argue with people who use them everyday. We all agree that AT&T is not the best, but you exaggerate the problems.
A story from the NYTimes or WSJ is not a testament of AT&T's service that shall be forever set in stone. You don't think its possible it has improved since the story was published?
Quote:
Originally Posted by teckstud
Right- and the NY TImes and WSJ have been lying as well to sabotage the iPhone.
I can say that GSM is known for poorer call quality than calls from CDMA. This is old news. I never expected GSM to be as good, and it isn't. The same holds true for calls made on T-Mobile from my experience.
In fact, people I know who have Sprint or Verizon here, tell me that call quality in Europe is poorer there. GSM again.
GSM call quality has an artificial sound to it that CDMA calls don't seem to share.
Cool- I always thought that but everyone keeps saying how GSM is so advanced.
But I'm like- if the quality is poor - who cares? Thanks for the info.
So then where's that CDMA iPhone that China's getting?
Right- and the NY TImes and WSJ have been lying as well to sabotage the iPhone.
1) Are any of these reports current, or the ones from last year when the iPhone first launched?
2) Do any of these reports mention any good coverage or just bad coverage all over as you have a tendency, to put it lightly, to focus on only the negative aspects of things? Even Melgross didn't say his coverage was great in all places, but he pretty much lives in a Faraday cage and has noted that his coverage has gotten better.
PS: If a comet flies close to the earth go to his house until it passes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross
GSM call quality has an artificial sound to it that CDMA calls don't seem to share.
Are you specially referring to GSM and CDMA or to UMTS/HSDPA and CDMA2000, as well?
Its interesting being someone who does not even use AT&T or the iPhone you argue with people who use them everyday. We all agree that AT&T is not the best, but you exaggerate the problems.
A story from the NYTimes or WSJ is not a testament of AT&T's service that shall be forever set in stone. You don't think its possible it has improved since the story was published?
Anything is possible - even you being logical. I'm so glad you're the spokesman for everybody. Apparently there are some that would say otherwise about AT&T - not all as you suggest. That is much more interesting.
Cool- I always thought that but everyone keeps saying how GSM is so advanced.
Who says that? GSM has issues that CDMA doesn't, like the soft-handoff that allows you to be on CDM2000(3G) network for data while making a call in CDMA(2G). That was never part of the GSM spec so an UMTS/HSDPA(3G) phone on that network will make calls in 3G, thus using more battery life while making a call. But that doesn't mean that GSM and UMTS/HSDPA are a bad choice for Apple. I think it's the best choice because the only other real option would be Sprint, not Verizon.
Quote:
So then where's that CDMA iPhone that China's getting?
You mean that rumored WiFi-less, 3G-less device that you'd have to pay double for to get shipped to the US so you can use in on Verizon with slow data speeds?
Been great in NY, CT, NJ, MA, PA, ND, SD, MN, TX, OR, CA, AZ, OH, FL, VA, AK... where else have I been this year? And I'm not just talking about airports. I'm looking forward to using Skype on my iPhone when we venture into China, HonG Kong, & South Korea later this year.
Comments
They're just getting a free ride off of Apple. I still can't complete a phone call without it dropping.
I have been a Cingular/ATT customer for years & have very few problems-certainly no more than people I know with other carriers. Do we expect too much???
Did AT&T report what percentage of their new subscribers came over for the iPhone? They better have a good trick planned for when the iPhone goes to other US carriers.
That state in the article...That means that 640k are new to AT&T for the iPhone.
Real question: What was the last device that drove people to switch carriers in such large numbers? Apple should have some powerful leverage with AT&T.
The last device was the original iPhone.
That state in the article...That means that 640k are new to AT&T for the iPhone.
He didn't mean that. He was asking what percentage of their new subscribers came from the iPhone, not what percentage of iPhone customers were new subscribers.
I've only had one dropped call since August.
Surely you must be lying. All I hear on these boards is how much AT&T still sucks in NYC.
I was in the City last weekend and I had full bars on 3G the whole time. Even had good coverage in buildings. Is there any way of knowing if they moved to 850MHz?
He didn't mean that. He was asking what percentage of their new subscribers came from the iPhone, not what percentage of iPhone customers were new subscribers.
Gotcha!
I've only had one dropped call since August.
Besides that- no static? from from either end? No distortion? My poor friend in Brooklyn - every other call he makes to me - he either has to call again or it's staticy.
Surely you must be lying. All I hear on these boards is how much AT&T still sucks in NYC.
I was in the City last weekend and I had full bars on 3G the whole time. Even had good coverage in buildings. Is there any way of knowing if they moved to 850MHz?
I'm assuming they have, at least in a number of places.
Even when the towers were spewing out on 1900, while I had poor speeds, I only had the one drop. When it suddenly improved markedly, several months ago, everything has been running pretty smoothly.
In Manhattan, people using all services have been telling me about problems. those huge building with their massive steel frames are going to be a problem in parts of Manhattan for years to come.
I had the poorest service in my home in Forest Hills, Queens. My house was built in 1925, with heavy mortar and plaster interior walls and ceilings, using a heavy steel mesh over wood lath to hold the material. This is NOT condusive to good signal reception! The windows help, but problems have occurred. But once service improved, it stopped being a problem.
Surely you must be lying. All I hear on these boards is how much AT&T still sucks in NYC.
I was in the City last weekend and I had full bars on 3G the whole time. Even had good coverage in buildings. Is there any way of knowing if they moved to 850MHz?
It's not only on these boards but it's been reported by the press for months.
I guess everyone is lying about AT&T and not only in NYC.
And it's not just an iPhone problem. AT&T (the patch network) is poor in general.
I'm assuming they have, at least in a number of places.
Even when the towers were spewing out on 1900, while I had poor speeds, I only had the one drop. When it suddenly improved markedly, several months ago, everything has been running pretty smoothly.
In Manhattan, people using all services have been telling me about problems. those huge building with their massive steel frames are going to be a problem in parts of Manhattan for years to come.
I had the poorest service in my home in Forest Hills, Queens. My house was built in 1925, with heavy mortar and plaster interior walls and ceilings, using a heavy steel mesh over wood lath to hold the material. This is NOT condusive to good signal reception! The windows help, but problems have occurred. But once service improved, it stopped being a problem.
Right- and the NY TImes and WSJ have been lying as well to sabotage the iPhone.
Besides that- no static? from from either end? No distortion? My poor friend in Brooklyn - every other call he makes to me - he either has to call again or it's staticy.
I've had noisy calls from every cellphone I've ever made calls from, no matter what network I've been using. So has everyone else I know.
I can't even attribute static to my side of the call any more than to the other end.
Sometimes the call is perfect, and sometimes not.
I can say that GSM is known for poorer call quality than calls from CDMA. This is old news. I never expected GSM to be as good, and it isn't. The same holds true for calls made on T-Mobile from my experience.
In fact, people I know who have Sprint or Verizon here, tell me that call quality in Europe is poorer there. GSM again.
GSM call quality has an artificial sound to it that CDMA calls don't seem to share.
Surely you must be lying. All I hear on these boards is how much AT&T still sucks in NYC.
I was in the City last weekend and I had full bars on 3G the whole time. Even had good coverage in buildings. Is there any way of knowing if they moved to 850MHz?
Like some of the guys here who don't even have a phone.
Then you're one of the lucky ones. Count your blessings.
Count me as another "lucky one." No dropped calls, quite happy with the service in Phoenix.
Right- and the NY TImes and WSJ have been lying as well to sabotage the iPhone.
I subscribe to both, and have read all those articles.
The fact is that I have had no real problems. That's also a fact. All the people here who say they've had no, or few problems should be believed as well. no reason to lie about it. You know me better than that.
Again, I ascribe the poorer quality of calls to GSM. My Sprint calls were more natural sounding, with less electronic buss and echo. Both of those problems are GSM problems. The iPhone itself may not have the best call quality either, from what I read.
But that's separate from dropped calls. Moving to 850 MHZ seems to help there.
A story from the NYTimes or WSJ is not a testament of AT&T's service that shall be forever set in stone. You don't think its possible it has improved since the story was published?
Right- and the NY TImes and WSJ have been lying as well to sabotage the iPhone.
I can say that GSM is known for poorer call quality than calls from CDMA. This is old news. I never expected GSM to be as good, and it isn't. The same holds true for calls made on T-Mobile from my experience.
In fact, people I know who have Sprint or Verizon here, tell me that call quality in Europe is poorer there. GSM again.
GSM call quality has an artificial sound to it that CDMA calls don't seem to share.
Cool- I always thought that but everyone keeps saying how GSM is so advanced.
But I'm like- if the quality is poor - who cares? Thanks for the info.
So then where's that CDMA iPhone that China's getting?
Right- and the NY TImes and WSJ have been lying as well to sabotage the iPhone.
1) Are any of these reports current, or the ones from last year when the iPhone first launched?
2) Do any of these reports mention any good coverage or just bad coverage all over as you have a tendency, to put it lightly, to focus on only the negative aspects of things? Even Melgross didn't say his coverage was great in all places, but he pretty much lives in a Faraday cage and has noted that his coverage has gotten better.
PS: If a comet flies close to the earth go to his house until it passes.
GSM call quality has an artificial sound to it that CDMA calls don't seem to share.
Are you specially referring to GSM and CDMA or to UMTS/HSDPA and CDMA2000, as well?
Its interesting being someone who does not even use AT&T or the iPhone you argue with people who use them everyday. We all agree that AT&T is not the best, but you exaggerate the problems.
A story from the NYTimes or WSJ is not a testament of AT&T's service that shall be forever set in stone. You don't think its possible it has improved since the story was published?
Anything is possible - even you being logical. I'm so glad you're the spokesman for everybody. Apparently there are some that would say otherwise about AT&T - not all as you suggest. That is much more interesting.
Did I say it was set in stone? No. But the attached article from March 13th would hardly suggest that I was being unreasonable. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/14/te...y/14phone.html
And if it has been improved since then - I wonder why it hasn't been reported?
Must be me- I forgot.
1) Are any of these reports current, or the ones from last year when the iPhone first launched?
I have provided you this link like how many times?? from March 13th, 2009. Why haven't you read it?
I not only talk the talk, I provide the chalk.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/14/te...y/14phone.html
Cool- I always thought that but everyone keeps saying how GSM is so advanced.
Who says that? GSM has issues that CDMA doesn't, like the soft-handoff that allows you to be on CDM2000(3G) network for data while making a call in CDMA(2G). That was never part of the GSM spec so an UMTS/HSDPA(3G) phone on that network will make calls in 3G, thus using more battery life while making a call. But that doesn't mean that GSM and UMTS/HSDPA are a bad choice for Apple. I think it's the best choice because the only other real option would be Sprint, not Verizon.
So then where's that CDMA iPhone that China's getting?
You mean that rumored WiFi-less, 3G-less device that you'd have to pay double for to get shipped to the US so you can use in on Verizon with slow data speeds?