AT&T defends its iPhone network via YouTube outreach

13468911

Comments

  • Reply 101 of 210
    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.
  • Reply 102 of 210
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by 7600/132 View Post


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



    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.
  • Reply 103 of 210
    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.

  • Reply 104 of 210
    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.





    Quote:
    Originally Posted by ravedog View Post


    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.





  • Reply 105 of 210
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by hiimamac View Post


    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!"
  • Reply 106 of 210
    razorpitrazorpit Posts: 1,796member
    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.
  • Reply 107 of 210
    al_bundyal_bundy Posts: 1,525member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by howyoudoin View Post


    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.







    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
  • Reply 108 of 210
    tulkastulkas Posts: 3,757member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by ravedog View Post


    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.





    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.
  • Reply 109 of 210
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post


    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.





    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.
  • Reply 110 of 210
    teckstudteckstud Posts: 6,476member
    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?
  • Reply 111 of 210
    mjtomlinmjtomlin Posts: 2,673member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by liltechdude View Post


    I don't agree with the notion that the other networks such as Verizon or Sprint would have had the same issues as ATT. Verizon, for example, has also seen a massive smartphone boom on their network



    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
  • Reply 112 of 210
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by ravedog View Post


    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!"




    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.
  • Reply 113 of 210
    samabsamab Posts: 1,953member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Tulkas View Post


    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.



    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.
  • Reply 114 of 210
    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.
  • Reply 115 of 210
    desarcdesarc Posts: 642member
    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.]
  • Reply 116 of 210
    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. What?s worse is that the objective viewpoints are likely being seen as AT&T apologists when they are only pointing out that the iPhone?s success would likely cause problems with any of the US carriers if the data usage was left as unregulated as it is on AT&T?s network.





    Quote:
    Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post


    AT&T has been building out their network since before the first iPhone hit the shelfs. In fact between them and the other carriers they even drew congressional interest due to tower construction accidents. To imply AT&T is not working on it is simply silly.



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





    Quote:
    Originally Posted by domerdel2 View Post


    looking from a 30,000 ft. perspective.. why is AT&T investing this much in 3G? By this time next year, Verizon is planning LTE (4G) ... I could be missing many factors into this, but it's like if 4G wasn't on the rise, AT&T would be throwing money at EDGE... seems like they're a step behind... i'm hoping verizon gets the iPhone....



    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 don?t even have the HW to support those kind of 3G speeds in a phone. LTE has much greater potential than HSPA+, but that isn?t why Verizon and most other CDMA-based carriers have chosen it. They?ve chosen it because it?s the best choice between WiMAX and now defunct UMB. I predict that we?ll 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."





    Quote:
    Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post


    Like I've said before, wait till (and if) Verizon gets the iPhone. They'll be on their knees too, crying 'uncle.' They should be careful what they wish for!



    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&T?s network.





    Quote:
    Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post


    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.



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





    Quote:
    Originally Posted by nvidia2008 View Post


    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"

    ...







    HAHA Next up, Electro-gonorrhea, the noisy killer.
  • Reply 117 of 210
    razorpitrazorpit Posts: 1,796member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by teckstud View Post


    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?



    Obviously it'll be with whatever the new offerings are.
  • Reply 118 of 210
    samabsamab Posts: 1,953member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by desarc View Post


    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.]



    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.
  • Reply 119 of 210
    samabsamab Posts: 1,953member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Logisticaldron View Post


    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&T?s network.



    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".
  • Reply 120 of 210
    Apparently AT&T is also faltering in their service for Blackberries:



    AT&T yanks BlackBerry Bold visual voicemail software update



    I guess it's the iPhone's fault.
Sign In or Register to comment.