I've been using AT&T since I booted Verizon for Cingular, and I've never had any problems. Not a single dropped call, no slowdowns, etc. And I use my iPhone from coast to coast. For the life of me, I don't understand where all of this whining comes from.
I've had the orignal iPhone and now the 3GS. I live in Boston where AT&T is strong. I rarely have dropped calls ever (certainly less drops than when I owned a Verizon flip phone). In NYC I certainly noticed a drop in 3G service.... The hardware is fine though.
I'm actually fine with AT&T's plan. The top 3%'ers can continue to pay the current rate for the unlimited data they are consuming and I can pay a subset of that rate based on my lesser data usage. Seems to me that is the only way they can reasonably move forward from a fixed rate.
The problem is that AT$T will not reduce your current rate because you use less. All they will do is charge the others more. They know if they only charged by the byte many, many users will be paying far less than they currently are.
NO ONE PERSON HAS THE RIGHT TO TALK JUNK ABOUT AT&T, EVERY PROVIDER HAS DRAW BACKS AND I HAVE HAD PHONES OVER THE PAST 12 YEARS ON JUST ABOUT ALL OF THEM.
Ah yes I do. I am a consumer and have every right to talk bad about AT$T. When my contract is up I am out, I will speak bad about them now and will speak with my wallet later. I love my iPhone but it is not worth the hassles AT$T's crap network puts me through.
I've been using AT&T since I booted Verizon for Cingular, and I've never had any problems. Not a single dropped call, no slowdowns, etc. And I use my iPhone from coast to coast. For the life of me, I don't understand where all of this whining comes from.
Well that makes you one. You are right, with your perfect service you wouldn't understand. Try having 1 out of every 3 calls drop. Try being in an area that has 5 bars and 3G and still can not get calls or use the internet (my own home). Try having AT$T tell you that I must have 3 Broken phones because their "map" says I SHOULD have full use. Again with your perfect service you wouldn't understand and shouldnt even try and compare. Oh and I live right outside the greater DC area, not in the middle of nowhere.
"Operation Chokehold" sounds like something fake Steve is doing in front of the computer, rather than a coy name for a protest against AT&T's service or lack thereof...
Anyway...
Whether it is 300 or 1700 who might participate in the protest of AT&T during Op. Chokehold, it seems rather "whinny" protesting "dropped calls" when compared to a protest of say, the killings in Darfur!, Croatian Ethnic Cleansing by the Serbs or Apartheid in South Africa and the jailing of Nelson Mandella, & unfortunately, more!
But what would be a more effective and efficient way to cut network usage by 40%, kicking out the top 3% of users or getting _everyone_ to cut back their usage by 40%? If it costs AT&T billions of dollars to build out the network to support the total bandwidth needed, it absolutely makes sense that those few people who are way, way, way beyond the typical user bear a fair share of the cost. I.e., they should pay 40% of the cost, not 3% as they are now. Also it's users like that who use their phones for crazy stuff that cause us all to pay so much more to get features like tethering.
Yes, but as someone has already pointed out, even when you kick the top 3% off, it simply makes room for a new top 3% of users. ATT advertised unlimited and now they are trying to blame their users - one more reason they get such poor ratings. Further, if you are going to kick off the top 3%, why not reward the bottom 3% with lower data usage bills?
AT&T has a long and truly heinous history of everything from individual customer ripoffs to policies that are hard to encompass without resorting to phrases like "crimes against humanity."
In a country where corporations routinely buy elected officials a six pack at a time, writing a letter to your Congressman is an exercise in futility. What's fascinating about this is the opportunity for individuals to take direct action, directing civil disobedience toward an economic, rather than government, target.
As an example, the scope of this far exceeds any individual's gripe against AT&T.
Yes, but as someone has already pointed out, even when you kick the top 3% off, it simply makes room for a new top 3% of users. ATT advertised unlimited and now they are trying to blame their users - one more reason they get such poor ratings. Further, if you are going to kick off the top 3%, why not reward the bottom 3% with lower data usage bills?
the current evil 3% are so far above most of the others in usage that it won't be a big deal
it's not hard to tell who is tethering and using non-iphone data plans in iphones and using JB'd phones to run bandwidth intensive apps. don't know why AT&T didn't do anything about it before
brian, I think you underestimate the obligations ATT has to report its infrastructure investments REASONABLY accurately, what with SEC regulation and all. A multiblllion dollar corporation can't blithely tell investors it's spending $18B to expand its network, and then do nothing. There are far more checks and balances on the corporation than on your understandable expressions of frustration. Even if the investments aren't enough to provide full and perfect service for everyone all the time, i'd not be so quick to assume the reported investments are simply lies, or that ATT "isn't doing anything" to improve its coverage. Discourse is usually disserved when people resort to extremes.
rtdunham, I understand where you're going with this, but also understand that if $18 Billion has been spent on top of what they have already invested and we're still having dropped calls, calls that sound like we're talking through a tunnel, tons of dead zones in a decent sized city like Seattle, then where are they spending their money that they are reporting? It certainly isn't going toward something that improves the quality of phone calls, or eliminating dead zone areas!
The day Apple removes AT&T's monopoly on the iPhone is the day I switch carriers. I hate AT&T and their horrible service. If this is what $18 Billion buys, they'll have to invest trillions in order to give us the service worthy of the 21st century. I'm not asking for massive amounts of bandwidth. I'm asking for calls to NEVER be dropped when doing something so complex as walking down a sidewalk, or having my calls breakup so I have to ask them to repeat themselves, or the sound quality to be good enough that it sounds like a conversation and not seriously distorted. I've been using that iPhone app they have, but I don't honestly expect them to fix anything. They are too busy lining their pockets. I still don't believe that they've invested $18 Billion. Not unless they are buying $5000 wire cutters or something.
rtdunham, I understand where you're going with this, but also understand that if $18 Billion has been spent on top of what they have already invested and we're still having dropped calls, calls that sound like we're talking through a tunnel, tons of dead zones in a decent sized city like Seattle, then where are they spending their money that they are reporting? It certainly isn't going toward something that improves the quality of phone calls, or eliminating dead zone areas!
The day Apple removes AT&T's monopoly on the iPhone is the day I switch carriers. I hate AT&T and their horrible service. If this is what $18 Billion buys, they'll have to invest trillions in order to give us the service worthy of the 21st century. I'm not asking for massive amounts of bandwidth. I'm asking for calls to NEVER be dropped when doing something so complex as walking down a sidewalk, or having my calls breakup so I have to ask them to repeat themselves, or the sound quality to be good enough that it sounds like a conversation and not seriously distorted. I've been using that iPhone app they have, but I don't honestly expect them to fix anything. They are too busy lining their pockets. I still don't believe that they've invested $18 Billion. Not unless they are buying $5000 wire cutters or something.
you wouldn't believe the price of "enterprise" hardware. EMC charges $800 for a "cheap" 500GB drive
i've seen fiber switches sold for $3000 but once you license all the cool features the price is like $30000 for the exact same hardware. and they really rape you on the support, especially the 24x7 4 hour response plans. a simple router will probably run you $20,000 a year for the support
AT&T's recent tough talk on bandwidth use was portrayed last week as an attempt by the carrier to regain control of its wireless customers. iSuppli Corp said that services like iTunes and the App Store and their connectivity with the iPhone have made customers more tied to Apple than AT&T. Wireless carriers would like to regain that control from their subscribers, the analysis said.
Gee, doesn't that sound familiar? Just what the record labels have been saying. Get used to it guys. Weren't the phone manufacturers dissing Apple pre iPhone launch? When will they learn? Don't underestimate Apple.
Just shut up and make a better product or provide a better service! AT&T is going to lose their goose that lays the golden eggs.
Why do people just take this top 3% use 40% of their bandwidth at face value?
That doesn't even seem to make sense. So every city that has issues has 3% of their customers using almost half their capacity....
how about some real numbers and locations and along with it numbers on their capacity in the affected area?
It sounds like bullshit to me. Of course if you have a shitty infrastructure with a lame antenna system with a super small pipe back to the internet.. then it's easy for 3% of the local customers to saturate your capacity. ten people getting e-mails simultaneously will kill the capacity of a shitty system.
It's most likely this is a ploy by AT&T and they are just full of shit.
And if you think about it.. It's a perfect ploy. Everyone gets shitty service.. So invent this fabled 3% user base that is fuckin it up for everyone so they need to tier costs- which will affect everyone.. but everyone will agree with it to stop those evil 3%ers!!
what's the big deal? if you are under contract w/ att you will still get UNLIMITED data through the end of your contract. in the near future new / renewing contracts will have far different terms.
if you hate att then break your contract or STFU. go to verizon and pay $45/ month for unlimited data or 30/month for 250 MB, pay 3 bucks a month for visual voicemail, all on top of your voice and text message fees.
you KNOW what you were getting into w/ att's network, especially the people posting to this forum. if you didn't know, shame on you for buying something without doing research first. caveat emptor
if 1700 people on facebook click to join a group, how many do you think will actually DO anything? 17? what if 100x as many people join this group? if 1700 people are going to try to bring down an 80 million person network... good luck. it worked so well with the launch of MMS on the iPhone.
We must remember that at&t is still well grounded in the past. If it were not for judge Greene in 1984 we would still be using the umbilical cord of yesteryear. at&t has been brought screaming and kicking into the 21st century. I am a reluctant customer who will change the minute I get a chance to change (I have an iphone). I am still ticked at Apple over giving at&t the exclusive rights. at&t is all about control and maximum profits. I really wish that they would spend some money on improving their network and quit the losing battle with Verizon (see microsoft ads vs Apple ads for the outcome if you went to a government school for the results). My hope would be for Apple to take over at&t but that is probably asking a bit much.
I only have anecdotal evidence, but it does seem everytime I'm at a large gathering (concert, football game, etc), my iPhone, running on AT&T 3G, has a really hard time maintaining a data connection, while my friends' AT&T Blackberry's pull up Facebook, and email photos, etc just fine.
That is strange. Perhaps they are directed to different towers based on something in the phone hardware codes or something? I would assume not, though. The saturation of towers would easily attribute to the slower performance in those circumstances, even the inability to connect at all.
Comments
... all these corporations need to stop filling their own pockets and treat us like customers.
...
when you grow up you will understand just how funny that is
We pay for unlimited data for the iPhone plans. If they couldn't deal with our usage, they shouldn't sale unlimited plans.
Are you certain your contract said "unlimited data" and are you certain that the contract disqualified them for changing the terms?
I'm actually fine with AT&T's plan. The top 3%'ers can continue to pay the current rate for the unlimited data they are consuming and I can pay a subset of that rate based on my lesser data usage. Seems to me that is the only way they can reasonably move forward from a fixed rate.
The problem is that AT$T will not reduce your current rate because you use less. All they will do is charge the others more. They know if they only charged by the byte many, many users will be paying far less than they currently are.
NO ONE PERSON HAS THE RIGHT TO TALK JUNK ABOUT AT&T, EVERY PROVIDER HAS DRAW BACKS AND I HAVE HAD PHONES OVER THE PAST 12 YEARS ON JUST ABOUT ALL OF THEM.
Ah yes I do. I am a consumer and have every right to talk bad about AT$T. When my contract is up I am out, I will speak bad about them now and will speak with my wallet later. I love my iPhone but it is not worth the hassles AT$T's crap network puts me through.
I've been using AT&T since I booted Verizon for Cingular, and I've never had any problems. Not a single dropped call, no slowdowns, etc. And I use my iPhone from coast to coast. For the life of me, I don't understand where all of this whining comes from.
Well that makes you one. You are right, with your perfect service you wouldn't understand. Try having 1 out of every 3 calls drop. Try being in an area that has 5 bars and 3G and still can not get calls or use the internet (my own home). Try having AT$T tell you that I must have 3 Broken phones because their "map" says I SHOULD have full use. Again with your perfect service you wouldn't understand and shouldnt even try and compare. Oh and I live right outside the greater DC area, not in the middle of nowhere.
Anyway...
Whether it is 300 or 1700 who might participate in the protest of AT&T during Op. Chokehold, it seems rather "whinny" protesting "dropped calls" when compared to a protest of say, the killings in Darfur!, Croatian Ethnic Cleansing by the Serbs or Apartheid in South Africa and the jailing of Nelson Mandella, & unfortunately, more!
But what would be a more effective and efficient way to cut network usage by 40%, kicking out the top 3% of users or getting _everyone_ to cut back their usage by 40%? If it costs AT&T billions of dollars to build out the network to support the total bandwidth needed, it absolutely makes sense that those few people who are way, way, way beyond the typical user bear a fair share of the cost. I.e., they should pay 40% of the cost, not 3% as they are now. Also it's users like that who use their phones for crazy stuff that cause us all to pay so much more to get features like tethering.
Yes, but as someone has already pointed out, even when you kick the top 3% off, it simply makes room for a new top 3% of users. ATT advertised unlimited and now they are trying to blame their users - one more reason they get such poor ratings. Further, if you are going to kick off the top 3%, why not reward the bottom 3% with lower data usage bills?
In a country where corporations routinely buy elected officials a six pack at a time, writing a letter to your Congressman is an exercise in futility. What's fascinating about this is the opportunity for individuals to take direct action, directing civil disobedience toward an economic, rather than government, target.
As an example, the scope of this far exceeds any individual's gripe against AT&T.
Yes, but as someone has already pointed out, even when you kick the top 3% off, it simply makes room for a new top 3% of users. ATT advertised unlimited and now they are trying to blame their users - one more reason they get such poor ratings. Further, if you are going to kick off the top 3%, why not reward the bottom 3% with lower data usage bills?
the current evil 3% are so far above most of the others in usage that it won't be a big deal
it's not hard to tell who is tethering and using non-iphone data plans in iphones and using JB'd phones to run bandwidth intensive apps. don't know why AT&T didn't do anything about it before
brian, I think you underestimate the obligations ATT has to report its infrastructure investments REASONABLY accurately, what with SEC regulation and all. A multiblllion dollar corporation can't blithely tell investors it's spending $18B to expand its network, and then do nothing. There are far more checks and balances on the corporation than on your understandable expressions of frustration. Even if the investments aren't enough to provide full and perfect service for everyone all the time, i'd not be so quick to assume the reported investments are simply lies, or that ATT "isn't doing anything" to improve its coverage. Discourse is usually disserved when people resort to extremes.
rtdunham, I understand where you're going with this, but also understand that if $18 Billion has been spent on top of what they have already invested and we're still having dropped calls, calls that sound like we're talking through a tunnel, tons of dead zones in a decent sized city like Seattle, then where are they spending their money that they are reporting? It certainly isn't going toward something that improves the quality of phone calls, or eliminating dead zone areas!
The day Apple removes AT&T's monopoly on the iPhone is the day I switch carriers. I hate AT&T and their horrible service. If this is what $18 Billion buys, they'll have to invest trillions in order to give us the service worthy of the 21st century. I'm not asking for massive amounts of bandwidth. I'm asking for calls to NEVER be dropped when doing something so complex as walking down a sidewalk, or having my calls breakup so I have to ask them to repeat themselves, or the sound quality to be good enough that it sounds like a conversation and not seriously distorted. I've been using that iPhone app they have, but I don't honestly expect them to fix anything. They are too busy lining their pockets. I still don't believe that they've invested $18 Billion. Not unless they are buying $5000 wire cutters or something.
rtdunham, I understand where you're going with this, but also understand that if $18 Billion has been spent on top of what they have already invested and we're still having dropped calls, calls that sound like we're talking through a tunnel, tons of dead zones in a decent sized city like Seattle, then where are they spending their money that they are reporting? It certainly isn't going toward something that improves the quality of phone calls, or eliminating dead zone areas!
The day Apple removes AT&T's monopoly on the iPhone is the day I switch carriers. I hate AT&T and their horrible service. If this is what $18 Billion buys, they'll have to invest trillions in order to give us the service worthy of the 21st century. I'm not asking for massive amounts of bandwidth. I'm asking for calls to NEVER be dropped when doing something so complex as walking down a sidewalk, or having my calls breakup so I have to ask them to repeat themselves, or the sound quality to be good enough that it sounds like a conversation and not seriously distorted. I've been using that iPhone app they have, but I don't honestly expect them to fix anything. They are too busy lining their pockets. I still don't believe that they've invested $18 Billion. Not unless they are buying $5000 wire cutters or something.
you wouldn't believe the price of "enterprise" hardware. EMC charges $800 for a "cheap" 500GB drive
i've seen fiber switches sold for $3000 but once you license all the cool features the price is like $30000 for the exact same hardware. and they really rape you on the support, especially the 24x7 4 hour response plans. a simple router will probably run you $20,000 a year for the support
AT&T's recent tough talk on bandwidth use was portrayed last week as an attempt by the carrier to regain control of its wireless customers. iSuppli Corp said that services like iTunes and the App Store and their connectivity with the iPhone have made customers more tied to Apple than AT&T. Wireless carriers would like to regain that control from their subscribers, the analysis said.
Gee, doesn't that sound familiar? Just what the record labels have been saying. Get used to it guys. Weren't the phone manufacturers dissing Apple pre iPhone launch? When will they learn? Don't underestimate Apple.
Just shut up and make a better product or provide a better service! AT&T is going to lose their goose that lays the golden eggs.
That doesn't even seem to make sense. So every city that has issues has 3% of their customers using almost half their capacity....
how about some real numbers and locations and along with it numbers on their capacity in the affected area?
It sounds like bullshit to me. Of course if you have a shitty infrastructure with a lame antenna system with a super small pipe back to the internet.. then it's easy for 3% of the local customers to saturate your capacity. ten people getting e-mails simultaneously will kill the capacity of a shitty system.
It's most likely this is a ploy by AT&T and they are just full of shit.
And if you think about it.. It's a perfect ploy. Everyone gets shitty service.. So invent this fabled 3% user base that is fuckin it up for everyone so they need to tier costs- which will affect everyone.. but everyone will agree with it to stop those evil 3%ers!!
bullshit.
if you hate att then break your contract or STFU. go to verizon and pay $45/ month for unlimited data or 30/month for 250 MB, pay 3 bucks a month for visual voicemail, all on top of your voice and text message fees.
you KNOW what you were getting into w/ att's network, especially the people posting to this forum. if you didn't know, shame on you for buying something without doing research first. caveat emptor
if 1700 people on facebook click to join a group, how many do you think will actually DO anything? 17? what if 100x as many people join this group? if 1700 people are going to try to bring down an 80 million person network... good luck. it worked so well with the launch of MMS on the iPhone.
Give one instance where this has happened. While you're at it, tell us how many people use more than 5 GB data on their iPhone in one month.
y.
bingo
you nailed it dude ATT CHARGES 30 BUCKS FOR UNLIMITED while most clients use little data
many clients are never 3 feet from their macs>>> so ATT RIPS US OFF BIG TIME
and now they want to charge more . FOR What?? UNLIMITED DROPPED CALLS !!!!
delete unlimited calling for 30 bucks and make it
10 bucks for small data dudes 25 bucks for med data dudes
and 100 bucks for the data pigs
or not
TS
We must remember that at&t is still well grounded in the past. If it were not for judge Greene in 1984 we would still be using the umbilical cord of yesteryear. at&t has been brought screaming and kicking into the 21st century. I am a reluctant customer who will change the minute I get a chance to change (I have an iphone). I am still ticked at Apple over giving at&t the exclusive rights. at&t is all about control and maximum profits. I really wish that they would spend some money on improving their network and quit the losing battle with Verizon (see microsoft ads vs Apple ads for the outcome if you went to a government school for the results). My hope would be for Apple to take over at&t but that is probably asking a bit much.
I only have anecdotal evidence, but it does seem everytime I'm at a large gathering (concert, football game, etc), my iPhone, running on AT&T 3G, has a really hard time maintaining a data connection, while my friends' AT&T Blackberry's pull up Facebook, and email photos, etc just fine.
That is strange. Perhaps they are directed to different towers based on something in the phone hardware codes or something? I would assume not, though. The saturation of towers would easily attribute to the slower performance in those circumstances, even the inability to connect at all.