Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

AT&T Publicly Responds to Verizon Ad Campaign

so, I bought the original iPhone on launch day, converted to 3Gs recently, but just sold it on CL and went with the DROID.

Can't say I'm disappointed....coverage and voice calls are fantastic. ATT coverage was finicky from time to time (Austin, TX). I love the iPhone platform...for me the DROID just works better (calendaring and the like). The network does seem superior though.

just 2 cents.
 
aokiqiao said:
Actually I have a friend with a "dumbphone" with AT&T and he doesnt get as much dropped calls as me and he always has way more bars than me. Mine will switch from 3G to EDGE to nothing back and forth and his signal is more consistant. Maybe its just the iphone?
Click to expand...

Maybe. But it's hard to extrapolate anecdotal evidence. Example: Reception on my iPhone at a place i have in Florida is horrible, to the point i added a $300 signal booster. At my home in northern ky/greater cincinnati (85-year-old block-on-block construction that should be much worse for signal penetration) my ATT service is pretty much impeccable. So while i first thought, in Florida, that it was the phone's fault, my experience in Ky suggests otherwise.
 
positive or negative, I think we can all agree on 1 thing:

it is a good thing that "seth the (tilty head wierd) blogger guy is not presenting this.
:D
 
Rocketman said:
We are lucky to have wireless data at all at this point. Looking forward to it being faster and more widespread.
Click to expand...

Amen. Many of us can recall the turn of the century, when wireless speeds were more like 9Kbps... over a switched circuit, so we were charged by the connection minutes, not by amount of data. Yikes.

The current $1 per day for high speed wireless is an incredible deal.

rtdunham said:
Did you see David Pogue's report that Verizon later this month intro's a new pricing scheme, whereby at the end of two years of a contract buyers of smart phones will STILL owe a $110 cancellation fee?
Click to expand...

I don't believe that's correct. I believe that the ETF lowers down until it's $120 for the last month, then drops to zero and you own the phone after that. (Verizon has said there's no ETF after your contract is fulfilled.)

It'll be a little surprising if other carriers don't follow Verizon's lead on setting the ETF higher for smartphones. Subsidies are way out of control, with people able to get a phone cheaply, then drop their plan and sell the phone for a profit. And ATT has almost a billion dollars tied up in subsidies, which caused their stock to drop.
 
AT&T should have just keep it's effin' mouth shut.

Nothing pisses me of more then when companies jab back and forth.

Screw AT&T and Verizon. When my AT&T contract is up. I'll make sure neither of them get my money.

If your sh*t covers 5 times the area, is still stinks, just 5 times more.
 
what confusion?

Right on, couldn't agree more. When your own advertising (AT&T's) has the effect of blurring the lines between 3G and just regular coverage, and when your most popular phone has 3G in its name, you can't then go back and try to soften your constant pandering of 3G this and 3G that and 3G everything to the masses after your competitor exposes that your 3G coverage actually sucks. That confusion, if any, you helped to create.

If you are going to brag about the strength of your manhood, maybe don't go crying when someone points out that it's actually limp and flacid, and although great when it works, it stretches a mere inches from its base and
only works under the moodiest of optimal conditions.


wlh99 said:
If there is any missunderstanding by the consumer of Verizon's ads, it's AT&T's and Apple's fault.

For 2 years AT&T and Apple have made 3G a key selling feature of the 3G and 3Gs. They mentioned nothing of voice coverage or EDGE service. 3G was a must have feature and the iPhone and AT&T had it.

Verizon responded by saying Verizons 3G coverage is better than AT&T. They said nothing more, nothing less. Now AT&T is backtracking saying that 3G isn't important because they have EDGE service outside those areas.

Whose fault is it *really* that consumers think 3G is required for an iPhone to work? It sure wasn't a few weeks Verizons ads. It was years of AT&T and Apple ads.
Click to expand...
 
nagromme said:
Everyone I know on AT&T hates AT&T and wants Verizon.

Everyone I know on Verizon hates Verizon and wants AT&T.

There are no good choices. I just want two cans and a string.

Bottom line: if you live anywhere AT&T gives you a signal, an iPhone is great! If you don’t... you can’t get an iPhone so get whatever deal you can find.

As for Verizon’s 3G... if it doesn’t work at the same time as voice, then it’s unacceptable to me. That’s a deal-breaker, when AT&T lets me look stuff up while I’m on a call.
Click to expand...

Exactly.

iPhone Wars: AT&T, Verizon and the evil of two lessors
http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2009/08/01/iphone-wars-att-verizon-and-the-evil-of-two-lessors/
 
verizon is in the wrong

I can't believe how idiotic most of these comments are. Just because a lot of you have anecdotal experiences of trouble with AT&Ts network means absolutely nothing on their claim that Verizon is misrepresenting their coverage. Sure, AT&T coverage isn't as good as Verizon, but it's much better than what Verizon is showing on their commercials. The commercial really does mislead people to believe that the blue areas on the map are the only places where AT&T has coverage. That's what I thought when I saw it. Regardless of what they say, the map leaves an impression.

Also, why are people complaining about what a waste of money it is for AT&T to address this? If motorola/nokia/whoever started airing commercials with blatantly false claims against the iphone that a bunch of dummies believed, wouldn't Apple be right in taking action?

It's amazing how frustration with a service causes so much irrational bias. "my service with AT&T sucks so therefore their claim against Verizon's misrepresentation must be false" ... do you realize how stupid you sound?
 
So let me get this straight.

Company's get sued for telling the factual truth. AT&T's Edge network is not the same as 3G. And that is what Verizon is getting at.

I have AT&T but I agree with Verizon. My work Cell phone is Verizon and I always have more bars on that phone than I do on my iPhone 3G. Sorry but the Truth hurts.

AT&T, Fix your crap so competitors can't kick you in the nuts.
 
dyler said:
Hello,


Does everyone understand that Verizon's so called 3g coverage is bs. Most of this so called 3g network is EVDO Rev 1 on this map they are showing on TV. This would be the same speeds as ATT edge. You have to compare Verizon's broadband availability to really compare. If you compare Edge to EVDO Rev1 they are in exactly the same places and if you compare Verizon's broadband wireless to ATT 3g they are exactly the same. If verizon was truthful then they would show a map showing red areas with broadband and then lighter red where EVDO rev 1 is and then ATT would be dark blue for 3g and then light blue for edge, that would be truthful comparisons but they knew if they did this then it would be the same map for both and their networks would be comparable and that would not work for their false advertising so they decided to do the evil thing and just lie to American consumers instead of telling the truth but what else do I expect from a company that sponsors extreme right wing rhetoric and events with the likes of Sean Hannity who was attacking our president at the rally and calling him Hitler, so verizon has now basically lied to the American public and supports a rally that is calling our President Hitler, all Americans whether they agree with Barack or not should call foul on this company and boycott them for these things!!!!
Click to expand...


Ok crazy person.

Umm, all of Verizon is EVDO Rev. A which is about the same speed as AT&T 3G. The major difference, as has been said, is that you can do voice and data simultaneously on GSM 3G.

But Verizon has much more coverage area in 3G EVDO Rev. A that goes up to 3.1mbps. That red map is all EVDO Rev. A.

AT&T does have a few 3GS pockets, but they also have their network kicking down to EDGE quite often, even in 3G coverage areas. That doesn't happen on Verizon. I never lose my EVDO coverage unless I'm in a lead lined box or something.

1x and EDGE are equivalents.

And VZ goes 4G next year in up to 50 markets and has a phone or two getting ready for it way ahead of everyone else (they've been working with both Nokia and Motorola).

How will AT&T look if Verizon gets out 4G phones a year or more ahead of them? How will Apple look if they don't have a 4G phone ready for more than a year after Motorola, Nokia, and others might hit the market with them.

Apple is waiting to ditch the AT&T exclusive. They wanted Verizon initially because of Verizon's consistent coverage and lack of dropped called or dropped data.

And AT&T's bad network is starting to play catch up. I know numerous dissatisfied iPhone users who mainly stay because they are addicted to the devices, but if Verizon offers the iPhone then AT&T will lose millions of customers. And if Verizon goes 4G? Well, that might make some of the iPhone users decide to leave it behind and try something else. How irritating would it be if the non-slider Droid hits with 4G and those users are consistently getting 10mbps and better and bursting to 100mbps while you're stuck with EDGE and 3G mixing up with each other?

Trust me, Apple is aware that if they don't play their cards right that the iPhone could see a huge drop off. They really need to go 4G early and go with Verizon because Verizon is going to be playing its hand in the first half of next year and it'll be a doozy.
 
topmounter said:
I would love to see what Verizon's network looked like if it was trying to handle all the iPhone data traffic :eek:

Of course your network is going to be awesome if you refuse to carry the iPhone :apple: and only launch ho-hum phones with crappy browsers.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry but NETWORK COVERAGE doesn't just disappear due to the iPhone.

A **** network is a **** network regardless of what phones they are carrying. Bandwidth usage is a completely different issue.
 
kdarling said:
...I don't believe that's correct. I believe that the ETF lowers down until it's $120 for the last month, then drops to zero and you own the phone after that. (Verizon has said there's no ETF after your contract is fulfilled.)...
Click to expand...

As Randy Newman sings in the theme to the "Monk" TV show, "I could be wrong...but I don't think so." :) Here's why:

Here's the excerpt from Pogue's Nov 12 New York Times article, "Verizon: How much do you charge now?". Verizon CEO Lowell C. McAdam responded with a letter not to Pogue, but to Times publisher Arthur Sulzberger. In his letter McAdam challenged several of Pogue's other complaints about the industry, but did NOT address the one I referred to, which is quoted below:

Pogue:

Starting next week, Verizon will double the early-termination fee for smartphones. That is, if you get a BlackBerry, Android or similar phone from Verizon, and you decide to switch phones before your two-year contract is up, you’ll be socked with a $350 penalty (it used to be $175).

This fee drops slowly over time ($10 a month), but after two years, it’s still $110. If the premise of the early-termination fee is to help Verizon recoup its original cost of the phone (see my analysis here http://bit.ly/pOkXz), shouldn’t the fee go down to zero at the end of your contract?
 
jav6454 said:
Check the speeds. not the burst ones, the real actual ones.
Click to expand...

When I had a Rev 0 data card I would usually get around 1000kbps, and this was not bursts. So you're saying edge is "much much" faster than this?

Maybe you're confusing 1XRTT with evdo, but even with 1X, edge isn't "much much" faster.

As I said, ridiculous.
 
heeb said:
I can't believe how idiotic most of these comments are. Just because a lot of you have anecdotal experiences of trouble with AT&Ts network means absolutely nothing on their claim that Verizon is misrepresenting their coverage. Sure, AT&T coverage isn't as good as Verizon, but it's much better than what Verizon is showing on their commercials. The commercial really does mislead people to believe that the blue areas on the map are the only places where AT&T has coverage. That's what I thought when I saw it. Regardless of what they say, the map leaves an impression.

Also, why are people complaining about what a waste of money it is for AT&T to address this? If motorola/nokia/whoever started airing commercials with blatantly false claims against the iphone that a bunch of dummies believed, wouldn't Apple be right in taking action?

It's amazing how frustration with a service causes so much irrational bias. "my service with AT&T sucks so therefore their claim against Verizon's misrepresentation must be false" ... do you realize how stupid you sound?
Click to expand...

I am amazed how stupid this comment is.
Misrepresentation?
The word "3G" is as big as all other words in the ads.
And it is always put in front of the word "coverage".
Both words appear many times, both visually and verbally, in the ads.
It's not like they have "3G" just in the fine print.
I don't know why you got the impression that the map is talking about the overall coverage.
I asked around and none of my friends who own an iPhone get that impression when they first saw the ads.
Just because you get a wrong impression doesn't mean the ads is misleading.
 
rtdunham said:
As Randy Newman sings in the theme to the "Monk" TV show, "I could be wrong...but I don't think so." :) Here's why:

Here's the excerpt from Pogue's Nov 12 New York Times article, "Verizon: How much do you charge now?". Verizon CEO Lowell C. McAdam responded with a letter not to Pogue, but to Times publisher Arthur Sulzberger. In his letter McAdam challenged several of Pogue's other complaints about the industry, but did NOT address the one I referred to, which is quoted below:

Pogue:

Starting next week, Verizon will double the early-termination fee for smartphones. That is, if you get a BlackBerry, Android or similar phone from Verizon, and you decide to switch phones before your two-year contract is up, you’ll be socked with a $350 penalty (it used to be $175).

This fee drops slowly over time ($10 a month), but after two years, it’s still $110. If the premise of the early-termination fee is to help Verizon recoup its original cost of the phone (see my analysis here http://bit.ly/pOkXz), shouldn’t the fee go down to zero at the end of your contract?
Click to expand...


No. The ETF does *not* drop to 0 by the end of your contract. It's designed to making leaving cheaper. It goes down to no lower than $50 by the end. After that, they eat the cost even thought he fee is not technically gone.

That author of that article is nothing short of a complete idiot.
 
I agreed with most of your points

However, till Verizon network can support voice and data simultaneously, I can't see why switching to Verizon is a good idea. It's a cripple network as far as I am concerned.

Aaton35 said:
From a subject point of view, I greatly prefer the Verizon network. I rarely experience any dropped calls on Verizon, the speeds from my USB modem are insane and call quality is almost always crystal clear. AT&T in the New York area is pretty good, however, when I travel to Florida, Texas, Minnesota or Southern California, AT&T call quality and reliability is a nightmare when compared to Verizon in those same areas. Unfortunately, Verizon lacks 2 things that I love about AT&T, the iPhone and rollover minutes.

I own a 3GS and a Moto Droid. The iPhone is simply the greatest smartphone I've ever used and I've gone through 8 Blackberries and an HTC Winmo device. The usability of the iPhone OS and the apps you can get for it make using it so much fun. The Droid is cool but the battery life is abysmal and the OS is clunky and slow. There is a lot of stutter when navigating through screens and basic functions like opening PDF applications is an absolute chore. The iPhone OS is smooth and beautiful and web browsing on the iPhone is not at all frustrating.

Long story short...

The day Verizon gets the iPhone and rollover minutes, they will be pretty much unstoppable.

These comments are purely my opinion :)
Click to expand...
 
jav6454 said:
Check the speeds. not the burst ones, the real actual ones.
Click to expand...

I can tell you that I've been using Verizon's EVDO service with various laptop cards and smartphones (Rev. 0 and Rev. A) since it launched, and it has ALWAYS been much, much faster real-world than EDGE. At the beginning, I would routinely see 400Kbps - 1Mbps down on Rev. 0. It would only drop into EDGE-like speeds (100-200Kbps) when the signal was low. At this point, on Rev. A, 400Kbps is "slow" and I generally see 1Mbps - 2Mbps.

On burst speeds, the AT&T service on my iPhone 3GS is theoretically faster than the Verizon service on my current Novatel V740 (3.6Mbps vs. 3.1Mbps), but I have yet to see either one manage more than about 2Mbps. We'll see what happens when AT&T rolls out 7.2Mbps service in LA, which should be soon.
 
Yes, I think

Arcady said:
Will 4G on Verizon allow voice and data at the same time? Because not having that is a deal-breaker for me.
Click to expand...

Same here. I was gonna buy the Droid for my brother so that I would have a change to play with the phone but it is on Verizon network which does not allow voice and data simultaneously; therefore, I decided not to. People do not realize how importantly it is to be able to do that on a smart phone. I want to be able to send/receive data to my co-workers - reviewing a report for example - while I am on the phone with them. Can't do that with Verizon network!!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back