Editorial: Hey, AT&T -- drop lawsuits, not calls
By Chris Ziegler 
posted Nov 13th 2009 1:33PM
posted Nov 13th 2009 1:33PM
- Verbiage on Verizon's site suggests that swaths of its 3G network are still running at EV-DO Rev. 0 speed: false. In fact, 100 percent of Verizon's 3G coverage has been Rev. A since 2007 -- the wording refers to 1xRTT, which is the transport technology in use where EV-DO hasn't been deployed.
- You can't distinguish between EV-DO and 1xRTT on Verizon's coverage map: false. Turns out Verizon has one of the more comprehensive coverage browsers among top-tier carriers. The technologies aren't called out by name, but they're there -- they list compatible features in different coverage zones, ostensibly to reduce customer confusion since your average Joe (not to be confused with our own Joe Flatley) doesn't know or care what "1xRTT" means.
- EDGE approaches the "low end" of EV-DO Rev. A: false. At the top end of the specification, EDGE can theoretically approach 500kbps in a cleanroom environment -- but in reality, it runs at a fraction of that and suffers more severe latency issues in practice (which is sometimes a greater detriment to a mobile web browsing experience than raw speed) than UMTS and EV-DO. Heck, AT&T itself claims 75-135kbps. Meanwhile, we got 823kbps on the downlink in real-world modem use on Verizon's Rev. A.
- AT&T's 3.6Mbps and 7.2Mbps deployments are significantly faster than EV-DO Rev. A: true, but only in theory. We're getting downlink speeds ranging from the low 100s -- yes, 100s -- to the high 800s in Chicago and New York; Chicago's got a trial 7.2Mbps network that's live, but even if we're not connected to it (hard to say), we should still be on 3.6. We seriously have no idea what AT&T's doing behind the scenes with these rollouts, but in urban areas, at least, they're not helping. At all. And that's assuming we can help ourselves from dropping down to EDGE.
- AT&T's service is augmented by the nation's largest WiFi network: we won't even justify that with a rebuttal.
- Verizon's gaming the system by comparing only their 3G networks: the truth hurts, AT&T. Verizon's commercials would have you believe that by comparing only 3G coverage, Verizon wins by a country mile. And guess what? They do. To AT&T's credit, the 3GPP's WCDMA technology path is considerably more advanced and extensible than EV-DO Rev. A is, but beyond UMTS's simultaneous voice / data capability, the end user's experience is pretty similar in day-to-day use. We go where the faster real-world speeds (and the reliable calls) are.
- Verizon is "defending steep losses" with its anti-AT&T, anti-iPhone commercials: false. Verizon added 1.2 million net customers in the most recently reported quarter, excluding acquisitions.
- LTE is "still years away from viable use" on Verizon: false. They'll have 20-30 markets commercially live in 2010, which is 20-30 more than AT&T will have. It's not nationwide coverage by a long shot, but it gives the carrier a notable lead in the 4G transition since AT&T has sparsely detailed its LTE plans and isn't expected to go live with any markets until 2011 at the earliest.
So listen, AT&T, we're sorry Verizon made you upset, but the solution's actually pretty simple: compete. Fix your network, keep scoring hot exclusives, and get hungry again -- because in a year or two, no one's going to give a damn that you used to have an exclusive on the iPhone.
OUCH!
Is there a way I can uprank an article?
Spot on in every way!
Everyone should take a donation to send some tissues to AT&T.
Perhaps not in every way. Ziegler correctly stated that Verizon moved it’s entire network to EVDO Rev. in 2007 and uses a link from 2009/06/29 to prove it , but he makes no mention of their acquisitions since then which may have not completed upgraded. Alltel was still in the process of EVDO Rev. A upgrades when Verizon was buying them out and I have read nothing that confirms that they completed their upgrades. They very well may have but it seems like he’s purposely overlooking what should be an obvious oversight to anyone looking into Verizon’s network.
The truth hurts! AT&Ts network is horrible. I have both AT&T (for my work mobile phone) and Verizon (for my personal mobile phone) so I use both on a regular basis and Verizon's network is so much better.
When my 3GS 2-year contract is up, I totally expect to be moving to a 4G iPhone on Verizon.
Well you might expect it, but I doubt you'll actually do it. VZW might have been aiming at ATT, but Apple is taking collateral damage. Why in the world would Apple give them a product they've so disparaged, even if it is an improved version? I think all this campaign has done is made ATT very aware of the need to roll out 4G, and to be ready for the 4G version of the iPhone.
I have no intention of moving to the iPhone (or whatever "other Apple phone") comes to Verizon Wireless, but I would agree with Don-Don that I would be surprised if there is not some version of Apple phone on VZW.
And to answer Toledo Guy's question as to "why would Apple give them a product?" That is simple... Apple likes to make money. So you are going to not sell a product to the largest Wireless provider in the country? That would be the epitome of cutting off their nose to spite their face. Other than the "iDon't" commercial, none of the Verizon ads go directly after Apple as much as at&t, and that is most likely on purpose. But I do hope you are right that this has given at&t a wakeup call that they need to step up the efforts to build out their network... and that was the point of this post to begin with wasn't it? That building out their network rather than spending money on (arguably) frivolous lawsuits is the key to their success.
Wow. AT&T is not helping itself. This is the traditional holiday season where families begin their shopping, where are the new phones?
Why is AT&T pushing Edge, normal people don't care. For those that do, explain what's wrong with your coverage and your network. Honest & straight forward answer will carry you a long way and generate good will with your customers.
Stop using one phone as a crutch to prop you up. Not everyone wants the same phone that every body and their grandmother is walking around with. I have to settle for sub standard consumer oriented (BB's excluded, their more business centric) phones because you have the *one* phone that leads everyone to the light?
I can't stand this. That being said, here in DC, I almost never have problems with my phone signal. And dropped calls are so few and far between that I don't think about it. If android were about one year more mature I'd be jumping ship--since AT&T refuses to carry one.
It really just comes down to which carrier works best network where you use it the most. If you travel a lot, you're probably going to want Verizon, so you'll have 3G in most places. I live in the Phoenix, Az area and don't have to travel much. When I do, it's to a large city and I've always had fast 3G with ATT, and not too many dropped calls. I left Verizon 4 years ago and haven't really looked back. This is just my personal choice. It's only going to get more interesting in the next few years when LTE will be rolled out and handsets will be able to take advantage of that. It's so stupid that we fight over carriers. Just pick what works best for you, plain and simple.
glad you aren't up around lake pleasant with your AT&T... you'd think twice about AZ AT&T coverage... and this is concidered in the valley.
Im with Verizon and I never loose a phone call. Ever And I live in the mountains in north east PA
@Alex
I can't say that I go up to Lake Pleasant often. It's been a few years. Personally, I think that lake is trash! It's dirty and over populated. I like going up to Canyon, but no one gets cell service in there. lol As far as actually being in the city, I have very good coverage. And my 3G is faster than Verizon. I have no regrets about leaving Verizon and going with ATT for the past 4 years. That may change when LTE starts going around and now that Verizon is finally getting some good phones.
Hey, let's not forget our friends in yellow when talking 4G. Sprint is the only current deployment.
T-Mobile has HSPA up in 3 markets and all markets w/ 3G will have it by year end
Sprint's 4G doesn't even count. They're the only ones doing WiMAX whereas everyone else is doing LTE. Sprint may be the first to have 4G network but it will be the worst 4G network in 2 years. Guaranteed.
Sprint has opted for the HD-DVD of 4g networks. Sure, they got a head start... to a dead end. It might help them in the short term in the few markets they have taken online already, but when LTE starts rolling out... then what?
What are ATT and VZN going to do about their spectrum deficiency? As for WiMAX, it and LTE are both OFDM...not a tough migration.
I guess the average Joe really doesn't know what the hell 3G even refers to. Otherwise, I know exactly what Verizon is saying in their ads. And you know what? I laugh everytime I see one, even though I have AT&T. Stop bitching AT&T and do something about it like grow your 3G network. I don't give a shit about EDGE. I care about 3G.
Spot on! If this case ever hits a trial, I bet this "expert" testimony shows up!
Why not respond to the wi-fi claim? Seems like a worthy topic of discussion... unless of course you just wanted to bash AT&T in a one-sided snark attack, and weren't actually willing to do any research beyond "my friend told me his internet is slow, too."
"and we're having a hard time arguing with personal experience."
If you consider yourself a journalist, this is part of the job description. Yes, even in an editorial.
Why not respond to wifi claim?
Because wifi isn't a substitute for one's network.
Wifi is spot coverage. They added Wifi coverage BECAUSE their EDGE coverage was so bad.
That's like getting a free dessert after a crappy meal. It doesn't change the fact that you had a crappy meal.
The main issue is I have with AT&T is that they had a chance and they BLEW IT!
When they got the exclusive on the iPhone. I thought -- what a smart move? this will give AT&T a chance to build their network (and play catchup) while retaining/attracting customers.
EPIC FAIL
YES, they attracted customers.
NO, they did not make their network competitive.
iPhone was their bailout. They blew it.
I remember when AT&T used to be ahead of the curve. A company always pushing the limits... Bell Labs? Lucent? Now it is BIG... and a failure... BIG FAILURE!
It's sad. They have become the Los Angeles Clippers of the Mobile Industry.
I'm with you Scott, Phoenix has pretty good coverage from AT&T. I'm happy!!
Are you guys serious? AT&T has more holes than swiss cheese in Phoenix! My iphone didn't work in my house, my office, and a few other regular places that I hang out. Want to know the sad part? I bail on them for Verizon, I picked up T-Mobile and the service has been miles better than At&t.
I agree 100% I just cancelled an iPhone contract on 10-31 and paid ETF for a phone that was activated on 9-15. The service all over the valley is horrid. Sales rep at the Apple store in San Tan Village even told me when I was buying the iPhone that he had Verizon because he needed a reliable phone.
I find it funny that AT&T is suing over what they believe are inaccurate or deceiving advertisement. They are the ones that claimed to have the fewest dropped calls yet a huge complaint of the iPhone was dropped calls. I had AT&T for a couple years and I couldn't go a day without a dropped call, I lived in a very populated area and I would go from full signal to no bars and back to full signal when I wasn't moving. I have friends who currently have AT&T and they continue to have the same issues in different parts of the country. AT&T also claims in ads to have the fastest 3G network, as the article states this is true on paper but in reality it isn't any better and in many ways worse than EV-DO Rev. A from Verizon or even Sprint in terms of real world speeds. Sprint currently has the head start on 4G coverage and Verizon will probably catch up in the next year. AT&T will still be yet another year from starting their deployment of 4G. I wonder what AT&T will try and claim when they are once again playing catch up on network speeds. I am sure they will come up with some stupid spin on things to do exactly what they are claiming Verizon is doing to them right now. I just hope nobody buys their garbage.
Fuck AT&T
Engadget: Apple Insider really ins't a reputable news source.... Apple could kill 120,000,000 people, and they would find a way to spin it as "totally innovative" and "the most elegant mass murder, ever" while finding some way to make the fact that their competitors didn't kill even one single human in the same quarter a sign of their inferiority to the all mighty, the one, the only....
You mention Sprint as being the only 4g right now with deployment? So when did a test zone covering 1-5 miles in Baltimore become actual deployment? I don't know how many people I have to tell on a daily basis that while Sprint may have the only 4g, unless you live in that radius in Baltimore, you don't have 4g.
Check your facts sir... Sprint has 4G in 23 Markets....
http://nextelonline.nextel.com/en/stores/popups/4G_coverage_popup.shtml
Either way 4G is irrelevant as there are no wireless (Voice) devices that can utilize it. It is only for Internet usage.
as an AT&T customer i'm glad verizon is running these ads. may be just may be it will convince at&t to fix their network.
So wait......Verizon users can't be on the phone and the internet at the same tine?.......What year is this?
LoL! Classic.
So wait, At&t drops calls in areas where it shouldn't even be an issue and is only in business because of a device on which the exclusivity rights are about to expire??? Do you seriously think that people will stay on after the Istorm blows over? Seriously doubtful.....They are a bunch of whiners and the only reason At&t is responding to VZW's claims in the way that they have been is because they now know they are in trouble. That to me is a sign of weakness....Are you scared At&t??? Because you are showing the world that you are. A lawsuit was a bad choice of action.....not a good way to win the confidence of potential customers, and an even worse way to maintain the confidence of the ones that you've got.
@Aleks
I would submit that launching an out of the blue "map" campaign with a play on another companies ad slogan, centered around tarnishing another companies network to tout your slower and less capable ""2.75G" network is....
"not a good way to win the confidence of potential customers, and an even worse way to maintain the confidence of the ones that you've got."
@drumdandrum
SLOWER?? HAH! I guess you missed the part above where Verizon's 3G (yes not 2.75G) network is faster than At&t 's 3G in the real world where it counts, and often times by a lot! To quote Chris....
"AT&T's 3.6Mbps and 7.2Mbps deployments are significantly faster than EV-DO Rev. A: true, but only in theory. We're getting downlink speeds ranging from the low 100s -- yes, 100s -- to the high 800s in Chicago and New York; Chicago's got a trial 7.2Mbps network that's live, but even if we're not connected to it (hard to say), we should still be on 3.6. We seriously have no idea what AT&T's doing behind the scenes with these rollouts, but in urban areas, at least, they're not helping. At all."
With my Verizon Mobile Broadband card I regularly get around 1mbit/sec download speeds. The map ad campaign is going to lower the confidence of Verizon's customers?? What? Thats just a retarded thing to say.
AT&T is the LA Clippers of the wireless world? Are you forgetting T-Mobile? :p Talk about being behind the 3G curve, and on an oddball slice of spectrum to boot.
AT&T has it's problems - no doubt about it. I've been on AT&T since moving to Maryland. I've generally been happy. I prefer GSM and WCMDA tech over CDMA. I travel so it's nice that my phone will work almost anywhere in the world. If you want GSM coverage, who else are you going to use? No way I'd use T-Mobile. That leaves AT&T.
Yes, I know Verizon has GSM compatible phones, but I'll get to why I'm not interested.
I was a Verizon customer several years ago. I couldn't wait to ditch them. It wasn't because of their network coverage - I was generally happy with the coverage. Their customer service was awful. 60-90 minute waits in the stores. The stores never answered their phones. And the general "you signed a 2 year contract, we have you now" attitude. They're the reason I'll never sign a 2 year agreement ever again. I also worked for Verizon for 3 1/2 years - I can't say I was treated any better as an employee when I carried a company phone.
There's another, more tangential but important issue for me - phone tweaking. I love that for GSM, HTC phones are highly tweakable and customizable. Cooked ROMs have done more to enhance my enjoyment from my phone than anything else. That doesn't really work well, if at all, with CDMA phones due to technical issues. I like that I can tether my phone with AT&T on the cooked ROMs. I don't like how Verizon cripples their phones. And some of their pricing plans just didn't work for me (texting Canada in particular would be much more expensive on VZ than on AT&T).
I'd be really happy if I could have Verizon's coverage with AT&T's technology. But since I live in an area where coverage isn't an issue, I don't worry about it. The places I go, 3G's available and when it's not, I'm usually driving anyway so it's not a big deal. Maybe if I lived on my phone and used tons of data I might.
For the average Joe, they're not going to care about 3G, EV-DO, EDGE, or whatever. You ask someone like my parents or grandparents, you'll just get a blank stare when you talk about them. I think all most people (outside of communities like this) care about are does my phone work when and where I need it? If it does, they're happy. So use what works best for you where you live and go.
No real reason for the fanboy arguments either way. They sell a service. If it works for you, use it. If not, pick something else.
Yeah what about T-Mobile? Oh wait they HSPA in 3 or so markets and will have it in all markets currently on 3G by years end...Also HSPA+ next year. How did AT&T (with all the Jesus phone money they are raking) let their Network slip. When they lose iPhone exclusivity next year they are effed... unfortunately so are the users if they go to Verizon because they will still be paying out the a$$ for service
When it comes to global coverage, VZW has more then a substantial global phone selection for a CDMA carrier, and with Vodaphone being one of the parents company they get decent rates globally, along with very comparable coverage to GSM. Not sure if you've been living under a rock since you got canned from VZW or what, but they just launched the Droid and the HTC phone, with many to come that are open source and completely customizable. Verizon has plans that allow you not only to call and text, but also go to Canada and Mexico without incurring any charges. And last, but not least, I don't see your grandma posting comments on engadget, the day that she does, that's the day that you can bring them into your arguments, they don't use the extra services, and in effect we don't care what they think. Reason I am bringing that up is because more and more so called average Joes have and will have smartphones soon. Within a years time %40 of all celllphone users will have smartphones. Times are changing superguy.
Well Verizon and AT&T are both extremely overpriced
If they were overpriced they wouldn't have the customer base that they do,I will gladly pay a $10-15 premium for a service that works....If you do 100 minutes a month and no data maybe t-mobile is the way to go for you, but if you run a business and need reliable service you go with the carriers that cost more, but are more reliable. Why do you think Lexus cost more then a Toyota even though it's the same car....You get what you pay for.
I was with V for 10 years and watched them slowly get worse the larger they got. At least with T-Mobile I get great customer service and get reception where I live and work. Verizon's network is not all that great...I live in the in 26th or 25th now largest market in the country and could not get service from V at work or home. So I would say their "map they've got for that" is a little off
I'm an AT&T customer and I have no problems with their service. Their 3G works well in my area so I guess that's why I'm not really affected by this little squabble.
I don't have issues with ATT in Orlando/Central FL area. Surprising to hear the complaints about their network elsewhere, especially NY, Chicago, LA.
If anything I'd love slightly less expensive data plans. iPhone is making me broke!
I can't be the only person to notice they didn't say which phones they used to test the speeds and coverage.....$20 says they only used iPhones, which are KNOWN to have a weak 3g chip. I have AT&T, but use a Nokia E71x and have not dropped one call on it since I bought it in June, my phone before that (Motorola Q9h) had a few dropped calls, but I'm willing to forgive 3-4 dropped calls over 2 years. BTW, I live in Dallas, but have traveled to Chicago and New York City (in the last 3 months) and got the same quality service I've always gotten with AT&T =)
I forgot to mention my data speeds (while I don't know real-world speeds) have always been extremely fast, especially in the 3g areas.
You're right about the Q9h being a tank on reception. Best reception I've ever gotten on any phone I've owned.
I love my Fuze, but the reception and call quality isn't anything like my old Q9h.
You're right about the Q9h being a tank on reception. Best reception I've ever gotten on any phone I've owned.
I love my Fuze, but the reception and call quality isn't anything like my old Q9h.
Bah, ignore that double post about the Q9h.
Now to Aleks and Richard, Geez, rude clods aren't you guys? They are phone companies. Neither shows you any love. They're out to get money from you. That's it.
No, I didn't work for VZW. Bad form to assume that I got canned, but I should have expected that from some Internet tough guys.
Until T-Mobile actually does it, it's all talk. They let their 3G network go for years, they put service in 3 markets and then all of the sudden they should be be believed? Show me the money. DT's really neglected T-Mobile USA.
Please show me where CMDA is used nearly as widely worldwide as GSM - not including dual mode phones. Vodafone is a GSM carrier. Verizon may get some decent rates on roaming but they're really comparable with AT&T's. Verizon has a whole 7 phones capable of roaming worldwide. Whoopty do. They're nice phones, but I'd hardly call that substantial.
My whole point with the grandma argument that you deride is that while this is Engadget, places like this tend to have myopic views and are very prone to groupthink. They may not pay extra for the service, but their limited use can make them profitable customers that allows companies to invest in better infrastructure - something AT&T definitely should do. Times are changing and smartphones are becoming more popular - no doubt. That doesn't mean that they're taking over any time soon. Many people don't want or need the extras that a smartphone can do now. If you've ever been out of the country, look and see how many phoens are smartphones. In places where peope are pretty tech savvy like Korea, I was quite surprised to see the US had more smartphones. Try to open your mind up and think about that for a little bit.
I know what Verizon offers - I haven't seen any plan with international text at anything than the international rates Verizon advertises. If they're including Canada, they're not saying it in their text plans or the T&C's. Verizon and AT&T both offer Canada plans at the same price. Choose what works best for you. AT&T works better for me for now and they've treated me better. Verizon works better for you. Everyone's happy. When LTE shows up, I can re-evaluate then.
I'm well aware of Android phones and what's been released - I read this site too and follow it. Android doesn't really impress me much. YMMV.
Do you have a link saying where 40% of the market will be smart phones in a year's time?
Funny thing is, I never said AT&T's network DIDN'T need to be upgraded, but I've been jumped on it like I have. I actually agreed, but I guess saying anything nice about AT&T will get you flamed on here.
Try arguing with some respect next time. It's possible to disagree without being a prick.
My bad, comment should have just been directed to Aleks. Apologies to Richard who wasn't rude.