AT&T defensively publishes private dropped call data

13

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 71
    Berkeley is as bad as San Francisco in making it difficult to get cell towers approved.



    Funny though that they don't complain at all about all the 545 THz EMF transmitters all over the city which don't even need a permit.



    People even have them in their houses and cars but don't seem at all concerned.



    But a cell tower....
  • Reply 42 of 71
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Beauty of Bath View Post


    Whilst it's not popular for people to dis wireless of all types in tech circles it fucks your body up. The industries (computer, phone etc) all cover it up but it is well known, such that before I bought my first mobile in 1986 I knew about it from an industry insider subsequently confirmed by a former Navy radio officer working in the cell phone industry. Telecoms engineers report 3x leukemia rates - the source can never be separated from background radiation by subsequent govt/industry (same thing) investigators.



    Search TETRA EMF for real bad news.



    So how does it work? Your immune system depends on a barrage of signals, literally tens of thousands per second, both chemical and electrical. With such a number and the realities of nature some go wrong but natural selection has determined how many going wrong is a safe proportion. Mass pollution, electrical (EMF) and chemical, increases the number of erroneous immune system signals. So there aren't specific illnesses associated with pollution there is a general increase in 'conditions' (as illnesses are now called by the industry that provides 'treatments' rather than cures).



    Really anyone who thinks that massively changing the nature of the human environment will not have detrimental health effects should better understand the nature of being and nature.



    @Dan, love your writings, love your attitude, hope you are man enough to dig deeper on this one.



    Plug those (sheathed) cables in!!!



    Given the density of all pollutants, mutagens and atmospherics, where would you even start? If, for example you conducted a 2 year double-blind study isolating EMF effects you could not state categorically that there was effect or not, simply because there are so many other agents in operation "out in the real world", which act singly and in concert, and could be modified by EMF. OUr houses are full of low-level emf as all AC wiring generates emf fields as a side effect of current flow, your light bulbs throw off all kinds of radiation, primarily visible, but also IR.



    All of this is rightfully concerning - but the sheer density of the agents involved make it impossible to isolate and study effectively, anything but the most extreme cases. BUt these activities are hugely misguided - the general populace will be (and is) decided ungrateful, even if you are proved to be right in the long run - but none of us will be around to savor that moment.



    In the meatime there are no definitive studies that prove categorically the claim that the current levels of radio frequency transmission
    Quote:

    fucks your body up



    and there are tons of sites that claim to have insider knowledge - all of which is anecdotal or conspiracy-laden, or simply poor science.
  • Reply 43 of 71
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Kevin Weber View Post


    After Apple releasing a product that has this major usability and reliability issue with how you hold it, I am happy I went with a Droid X. I'm lucky enough to get my phone paid by my company and could have chosen an iPhone4, but decided purely on the issue of the call reliability.



    After hearing for years how the dropped calls were ATT's fault, I think people should be more critical of Apple. They do design beautiful looking phones that probably have the best, most cohesive software. But its rediculous that that they come out and say that their new phones have less than 1 in 100 more dropped calls. Their phones should be getting better-not worse or staying the same. They have gotten a pass on the blame for the dropped calls for too long. They should have hired those antennae engineers years ago. The iphone is after all a phone, not just an iPod Touch (which I have and love).



    And you know all of this how exactly (word of warning: anecdotal web-based evidence is not definitive nor factual, and therefore not allowed)?



    Again, nothing against those who are actually having problems, but those reports are seriously at odds with my own experience with the iPhone 4 - better call reception <NO> dropped calls so far from the day it was activated, cannot get my death grip to drop more than one bar if it drops at all - and all in all a far better experience than any other cellphone - including the Androids I checked out carefully when my contract came up, period. YMMV.



    However I applaud the fact that you weighed the evidence you had and made an informed consumer decision about your phone choice. May your Droid give you many happy days of undropped calls and enjoyable apps.
  • Reply 44 of 71
    davegeedavegee Posts: 2,765member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by davebarnes View Post


    I read the entire article BEFORE I noticed who wrote. But, when I go to the end, I thought: only Daniel could have written this.



    San Francisco is the most dysfunctional city I know of. And, I love to visit as a tourist.

    But, the idiotic laws that both the Board and the citizens pass are just insane.



    Yea... I hear ya... Might this have something to do with the fact that 1 in 6 citizens are medical marijuana card holders?
  • Reply 45 of 71
    People opposing mobile phone towers on safety grounds do not seem to realise that towers actually reduce one's exposure to EMF. The peak energy exposure to a person due to the mobile phone network occurs from the mobile phone, not from the tower. This is because energy exposure decreases rapidly with distance and your mobile phone is relatively close to you. As you move closer to a tower, less energy needs to be transmitted by your phone to reach the tower, and hence you will be exposed to less energy. The more towers there are, the less energy exposure there will be for your family or friends using mobile phones.
  • Reply 46 of 71
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Kevin Weber View Post


    After Apple releasing a product that has this major usability and reliability issue with how you hold it, I am happy I went with a Droid X. I'm lucky enough to get my phone paid by my company and could have chosen an iPhone4, but decided purely on the issue of the call reliability.



    After hearing for years how the dropped calls were ATT's fault, I think people should be more critical of Apple. They do design beautiful looking phones that probably have the best, most cohesive software. But its rediculous that that they come out and say that their new phones have less than 1 in 100 more dropped calls. Their phones should be getting better-not worse or staying the same. They have gotten a pass on the blame for the dropped calls for too long. They should have hired those antennae engineers years ago. The iphone is after all a phone, not just an iPod Touch (which I have and love).



    What engineers would you have them hire? Who specifically?



    I don't agree with your assessment of either Apple or AT&T. While I am not a fan of AT&T, I have had both Apple and AT&T since 2007, and I've never experienced a dropped call. NEVER. And I don't make short phone calls, either. I travel regularly within Texas, between major cities, and the service and signal quality has been excellent. So between your second-hand anecdotes and my first-hand experience, I'll have to go with my experience.



    P.S., I don't doubt that people have dropped calls or signal issues, but that these issues are atypical. Even if ChangeWave's stats on AT&T are valid in your particular situation, that still means that over 95% of calls don't drop.
  • Reply 47 of 71
    chrispychrispy Posts: 17member
    AT$T - The Call Failed Company
  • Reply 48 of 71
    sailorpaulsailorpaul Posts: 322member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by macinthe408 View Post


    I agree with AT&T that dropped call statistics obtained anecdotally is severely flawed, laying a dropkick to the scientific method's larynx.



    If anything, it's a single-blind study: AT&T users have heard how crappy their network is for so long that they'd be happy to gripe about the one dropped call they had 12 years to someone calling to obtain their "scientific opinion."



    AT&T, I'm with you on this one.



    Now give me a $100 gift card.





    No gift card for you. That's not how ChangeWave does it's research.



    Instead ChangeWave takes people (primarily business employees) in several hundred vertical markets, who register and commit to providing insights into business trends in their vertical market. I get about five detailed surveys a year to complete. In return, I get an early look at what's being asked in my own market and first crack at the answers on all the other surveys. ChangeWave's focus is all about spotting trends early, works for me
  • Reply 49 of 71
    nvidia2008nvidia2008 Posts: 9,262member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by macinthe408 View Post


    I agree with AT&T that dropped call statistics obtained anecdotally is severely flawed, laying a dropkick to the scientific method's larynx.



    If anything, it's a single-blind study: AT&T users have heard how crappy their network is for so long that they'd be happy to gripe about the one dropped call they had 12 years to someone calling to obtain their "scientific opinion."



    AT&T, I'm with you on this one.



    Now give me a $100 gift card.



    That ChangeWave survey is not suitable. 4,000 people, and asking them, "Hey, so.. umm... how many dropped calls you had? What'dya think?"



    I'm not saying ATT is good or not, just saying the ChangeWave methodology is not appropriate for the data needed.
  • Reply 50 of 71
    nvidia2008nvidia2008 Posts: 9,262member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by SailorPaul View Post


    No gift card for you. That's not how ChangeWave does it's research.



    Instead ChangeWave takes people (primarily business employees) in several hundred vertical markets, who register and commit to providing insights into business trends in their vertical market. I get about five detailed surveys a year to complete. In return, I get an early look at what's being asked in my own market and first crack at the answers on all the other surveys. ChangeWave's focus is all about spotting trends early, works for me



    Fair enough, it's interesting for spotting trends, and so on. But as a metric on dropped calls and cellular network performance, I don't think it's suitable.
  • Reply 51 of 71
    avidfcpavidfcp Posts: 381member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by maccherry View Post


    att has the money to upgrade but doesn't want to spend it.



    2 things and not about your post, ok make it 3.

    1. The data is hardly scientific but perhaps true but they probably have more smart phones.

    2. No FREE CITY WIDE WIFI? Are they crazy????

    3. This was actually number 1's second half. Lol.
  • Reply 52 of 71
    eacummeacumm Posts: 93member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Cory Bauer View Post


    Well first of all, I don't know if I believe AT&T's claims of only dropping 1.44% of calls made with 3G cellphones; that seems awfully unlikely given their terrible reputation. Secondly, any iPhone 3G or 3GS owner who's been on the AT&T network the past couple of years can tell you there's no way in hell they only drop 1 or 2 out of 100 calls. Even only 5 out of 100 seems highly unrealistic. I only make about one call a day, and I know I've had at least 1-2 lost calls per month for as long as I've been on AT&T. If I had to guess based on my own experience, iPhone's have about a 6% dropped-call rating, but because so many iPhone owners are more data users than call makers it doesn't drag down AT&T's total 3G dropped calls as much as it would if iPhone users were frequent call-makers.



    Most places I gone when I had iPhone 3G and iPhone 3GS I have had great service Now expect the same quality from my iPhone 4, if I droped 5 calls in a year that would be a lot, except when in New York's Bayridge Anchorage, you drop call right and left and it does not matter if you are with AT&T, SPRINT, T-Mobil or Verizon. But I would say this does not have to do with the cell phone companies, it has to do with the BOAT swinging around on the anchor.
  • Reply 53 of 71
    chrosschross Posts: 1member
    What a dumbass group. SNAFU is definitely a fitting anacronym for them. I hope somebody from their pathetic group comes to read this so they can see how badly they've destroyed San Fransisco's image. Unbelievable.
  • Reply 54 of 71
    ssquirrelssquirrel Posts: 1,196member
    I don't have an iPhone, but my friends who have them ehre in Louisville KY say that AT&T service is perfectly fine here, no problems like you hear about with San Fran and NYC. I'm still on Sprint and usually if I have a dropepd call, it's b/c my mom is on the other end in the shitty reception area I grew up in.
  • Reply 55 of 71
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Beauty of Bath View Post


    So there aren't specific illnesses associated with pollution there is a general increase in 'conditions' (as illnesses are now called by the industry that provides 'treatments' rather than cures).



    While I am not disagreeing with you, because we do put an awful lot of crap in, on, and around our bodies - I do have an alternate theory that I pulled right out of my nether regions.



    What if the "general increase in 'conditions'" comes from better overall medical services?



    I mean, we now have better testing, better detection, and more data tracking.



    Think about it a bit. People didn't used to live as long, so some things that we see now in older ages were not hit as regularly when people were dying in their 60s. People use to just live with things and not get medical help as much. People used to mis-diagnose all kinds of things and never get to what was really wrong. And now there is much more data tracking and statistical analysis. In the olden days when you went to the doctor he might have treated you and never told anyone about it - now every time you visit every single diagnosis and test is tracked and reported and counted... And additionally, before the internet the only people who knew about junk like this was people who read medical journals - but now every yahoo with a blog and an RSS reader thinks they are experts in every field under the sun.



    So maybe the actual statistical occurrences of 'conditions' is not rising, but rather our knowledge of them is.



    Quote:

    You know, medicine is not an exact science, but we are learning all the time. Why, just fifty years ago, they thought a disease like your daughter's was caused by demonic possession or witchcraft. But nowadays we know that Isabelle is suffering from an imbalance of bodily humors, perhaps caused by a toad or a small dwarf living in her stomach.



    -Theodoric, Barber of York



    Another thing that I think about a lot, is that while we are putting all sorts of crap in us (High Fructose Corn Syrup, Hydrogenated Oils, Aspartame, Chemicals from Sunscreen, Household VOCs, whatever - you name it) we also have improved our environment quite a bit in the last 50 years too. Our water and air is much much much cleaner than it was as recent as the late 60s and early 70s. We have restricted and regulated exposure to toxics in workplaces and many chemicals that were commonly used all over are now highly restricted. We have been cleaning up pollutants like Lead for years. And we have reduced exposure to second-hand-smoke in many places. So while some things are getting worse, some things are getting better too.



    My theory about cell towers - again, remember this is all coming out of my tukus - is that there is so much natural radiation, that all of our signals are mere droplets in the bucket. For one, the sun cooks us with ooodles and oodles of radiation. For two, just about everything is radioactive: Table Salt, Wristwatches, you name it. And for three - even if you don't allow that cell tower to be built, we have radio signals from TV tower, FM/AM towers, Satellites of all kinds, Short Wave radio, CB, FRS, Bluetooth, Wifi, Microwave transmission, Radar, WiMAX, all cellular systems, cordless phones, RF remote repeaters, and whatever else. You are going to be bombarded with radio waves from every direction all the time anyway, whether or not there is a tower in your neighborhood. Even the electrical wires in your walls spit out EMF.



    I think it is funny that people would fight cell towers so much - yet we have High Fructose Corn Syrup in everything (why does fruit jelly need HFCS?) We could probably do much better for the health of the world just by making sure that poor people get proper nutrition and vitamins to their children than we can by protesting cell towers.



    EDIT:

    Oh, and 40,000 people a year are killed by the automobile in the United States alone.
  • Reply 56 of 71
    pmzpmz Posts: 3,433member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post


    If these numbers are true -- and there is no reason to suspect that they are not -- then ATT is really getting a bum rap from a bunch of loud, hyperventilated whiners from a couple of places like NYC and SF. That somehow seems to be getting amplified into an unfair perception of a larger, nation-wide problem when it simply may not be true.



    Come on. Did you ever doubt that things were any different? I've known since the first month owning an iPhone in July 2007 that the entire AT&T service "thing" was a frigging joke, propped up only by the loudest, whiniest individuals. That's how EVERYthing works, these days.



    Squeeky wheel doesn't get the oil, anymore, it gets other fully-functioning wheels to squeek.
  • Reply 57 of 71
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by BUSHMAN4 View Post


    FACT IS FACT. Survey after survey has continuously shown that ATT is the worst service in many areas.



    Survey != FACT



    And by the way, I just switched to AT&T from TMobile, for the iPhone 4. I have not had a single problem with coverage, service, or dropped calls - other than the well documented and soon-to-be-fixed problem with HSUPA and Alcatel/Lucent equipment. (I am in one of those affected markets).



    My signal service, coverage, and effectiveness is far better with AT&T than it was with TMobile. However, it is worth noting that I was a 6 year extremely satisfied customer with TMobile and I highly recommend TMobile. And when the iPhone4 hits TMobile I am going to be bummed that I switched, just because TMobile customer service is outstanding (although I have had good results so far with AT&T too). But AT&T's coverage footprint is better than TMobile...
  • Reply 58 of 71
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Beauty of Bath View Post


    Whilst it's not popular for people to dis wireless of all types in tech circles it fucks your body up. The industries (computer, phone etc) all cover it up but it is well known, such that before I bought my first mobile in 1986 I knew about it from an industry insider subsequently confirmed by a former Navy radio officer working in the cell phone industry. Telecoms engineers report 3x leukemia rates - the source can never be separated from background radiation by subsequent govt/industry (same thing) investigators.



    Search TETRA EMF for real bad news.



    So how does it work? Your immune system depends on a barrage of signals, literally tens of thousands per second, both chemical and electrical. With such a number and the realities of nature some go wrong but natural selection has determined how many going wrong is a safe proportion. Mass pollution, electrical (EMF) and chemical, increases the number of erroneous immune system signals. So there aren't specific illnesses associated with pollution there is a general increase in 'conditions' (as illnesses are now called by the industry that provides 'treatments' rather than cures).



    Really anyone who thinks that massively changing the nature of the human environment will not have detrimental health effects should better understand the nature of being and nature.



    @Dan, love your writings, love your attitude, hope you are man enough to dig deeper on this one.



    Plug those (sheathed) cables in!!!



    This is the biggest pile of unadulterated garbage that I have encountered in a long while. This is the sort of nonsense that makes people who have ever actually studied science want to hurl. The scary thing is that it is apparent that there are lots of people, particularly in SF, who think in this manner. Here we live in a world where we have stepped foot on the moon, have invented computational machines that would have been thought impossible to most anyone alive a century ago, routinely undergo surgical procedures that border on the miraculous, etc., etc., etc., and we still have lots and lots of people who do not have the first clue about what science is or how it works.
  • Reply 59 of 71
    maestro64maestro64 Posts: 5,043member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by kaisersoze View Post


    This is the biggest pile of unadulterated garbage that I have encountered in a long while. This is the sort of nonsense that makes people who have ever actually studied science want to hurl. The scary thing is that it is apparent that there are lots of people, particularly in SF, who think in this manner. Here we live in a world where we have stepped foot on the moon, have invented computational machines that would have been thought impossible to most anyone alive a century ago, routinely undergo surgical procedures that border on the miraculous, etc., etc., etc., and we still have lots and lots of people who do not have the first clue about what science is or how it works.





    Face it people who are not engineers or scientist far out number those who are therefore your fighting a loosing battle they will believe what they want and are told since the lack the skill to analysis what really is going on.
  • Reply 60 of 71
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Maestro64 View Post


    Hey do you know microwaves will cook you form the inside out if you stand in front of a microwave tower. This is true give it a try. This exact how they invented the microwave oven in your home. They found that telecom engineers who would stupid enough to align microwave transmitters with the power on were dying from internal burns, they cook their organs. So if it was not for them dying you would not have that microwave in your house.



    So it does not surprise me that engineer had ill-affect from their activities, some time engineer do not think through the possible outcome of stand in front of high power transmitters or other activities.



    Also, do you know that for the longest time transmitter on ships did not have warning and people would walk right past them when they were operating. Today an all shipped they have area of the ship where you not allow to be due to radar systems and communications system because if you stand in front on them you will die or be serious injured. This only an issue under high power not low power. There is no causal to back this up.



    lastly you know some people are more likely to get a disease or be sick then other people so any activity they do might cause them to have problems verses someone else. Just because someone got sick or came down with a disease it not proof the activity caused it.



    RADAR was invented at least as far back as WWII, and was deployed widely then. It was well known that when it rained, the signal was attenuated, i.e., was being absorbed by water molecules in the air. For a sixty-five years at the very least, it has been well known that electromagnetic radiation at the right, short wavelengths are absorbed by moisture and therefore by the human body, and that if the power is sufficient, you can cook with it. It is exceedingly unlikely that any engineer would ever have assumed that there would be no appreciable absorption of microwave energy, and therefore unlikely that any engineers working on RADAR during WWII would have put themselves at risk. But even if that is not the case, i.e., even if perchance there was some engineer so stupid as to ignore this obvious possibility, it is ludicrous to suggest that microwave ovens came about as a consequence of telecom engineers accidentally receiving burns. This is simply preposterous. Any engineer working in this field is fully aware that electromagnetic radiation at any wavelength is pure energy, and as such, would surely not put themselves at that kind of risk. And even if they did, this would not be a correct explanation for how microwave ovens came to be invented, because it was well known, at least as early as WWII, that water absorbs microwave energy.



    Where do people come up with this kind of stuff? Why do people pass along this kind of stuff without having any substantive reason to believe that it is true?



    And even though microwave radiation does have this heating effect, the mechanism by which it occurs is believed to be strictly a resonance effect related to the chemical bonds, i.e., the bonds by which the oxygen atoms and the hydrogen atoms are bonded. It is not believe that this effect is capable of separating water molecules into constituent hydrogen and oxygen molecules, but even if that were to occur, it would not be at all the same as any sort of nuclear effect, i.e., the individual atoms are not altered by this particular effect. As such, the effect by which microwave ovens are known to work, is entirely different from any potential effect by which microwave radiation would be likely to cause cancer. Gamma radiation is a different beast entirely. The effects of electromagnetic radiation are dependent on the wavelength. Electromagnetic radiation of one particular wavelength has effects that are fundamentally distinct from the effect of electromagnetic radiation at a very different wavelength.



    I'm tired of this. It is apparent that the general public is scared anything that is associated with the word "radiation", which fact is sad commentary, given that ordinary light is radiation. Sure, there is radiation that can hurt you a lot in a hurry. No question about that. But it is wrong and nonsensical to think that radiation is inherently harmful. Light is not inherently harmful. Microwave radiation can cook you (from the outside in and not from the inside out) if the power level is adequate, but this fact in and of itself does not mean that microwave radiation has an effect akin to the effect of gamma radiation.
Sign In or Register to comment.