Ultimate iPhone dis is against ATT

http://www.slate.com/id/2195289/

This is a review from an Apple true believer whose argument
cuts right through all the others about the proprietary software,
associated plan costs, deficient hardware functions, etc. etc.

The writer simply can't make calls on the network because the
network apparently blows like a hurricane.

I'm not necessarily taking sides - I've never had an iPhone
and never been on AT&T. I know only one, maybe two people using their
network and not well enough to get a status report on whether things
have improved. But in the past I've heard lots of complaints. This
writer, like I am, is in NYC (where you'd think the company would try
to establish a solid presence).

Ultimately, what it comes down to is whether one can connect
to others via voice. That's what a phone is for. AT&T apparently has
truly grievous problems in that department. According to this writer,
they might have surmounted them in the past year, but didn't.

I'd heard reports about (the lack of) AT&T network quality,
but assumed that with the sale of so many iPhones they'd plow their
profits back into the architecture. It looks like they prefer to
coast.

This, to me, is the most discouraging thing about the iPhone,
and completely negates whatever promise it offers.

I realize I'm not saying anything new here, but I did find
reading the piece edifying.

DGI

---

› See More: Ultimate iPhone dis is against ATT

Previously on alt.cellular.attws, David G. Imber said:

> The writer simply can't make calls on the network because the
> network apparently blows like a hurricane.

I cannot speak for anyone but myself. I've been with AT&T/Cingular for
about three years. I switched from Verizon because where I was living
at that time was in a CDMA dead spot (no Verizon, no Sprint and poor
Nextel), but excellent GSM coverage.

About a year and a half ago, I moved to another market area.

Since I've had Cingular, now AT&T, I have zero complaints about the
coverage in my home or where I work. In my travels, the only problem
areas I found are either places where all carriers have problems due to
local topography or the locals saying "no cellular towers here".

The only place I've gone where I had no coverage but Verizon users did
was the basement of my brother's house, but AT&T must've activated a
new tower as that problem only lasted a couple of months.

Where I am now does not currently have 3G access, but according to
AT&T, it will by the end of this November.

As a matter of fact, the only problem I have with AT&T is due to one
specific CSR screwing up my phone upgrade availability, and she is
apparently under suspension now anyway.

--
Jeffrey Kaplan www.gordol.org
The from userid is killfiled Send personal mail to gordol

"Mr. Morden and his associates worry me." (Amb. Mollari, B5
"Ceremonies of Light And Dark")

On Tue, 15 Jul 2008 15:52:21 -0500, Ron <[email protected]>
wrote:

>On Tue, 15 Jul 2008 13:56:26 -0400, David G. Imber
><[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> http://www.slate.com/id/2195289/
>>
>
>Absolutely zero specifics on where he had what problems with the
>network.

You're right. And I've heard similar complaints about Sprint
that made the service sound awful, but I've been with them for nine
years and don't have a single, not one, complaint about the coverage.
(there are complaints, but not those)

But while I could be wrong about this, the one thing I know is
that the writer is in New York City. And I can't see how reception can
be spotty anywhere in New York City. It's really not reasonable that
they'd, at this point, still be struggling to build out the network in
a major metropolitan area.

I have to ask myself, without any long knowledge or insight
into the subject why, if both Apple and AT&T called the sale of the
original iPhone a "success", and Apple spent the past year working on
improving their product to some extent, they wouldn't DEMAND that AT&T
do its job and take the year to prepare for the launch of the next
phase iPhone, which was bound to increase the user base. Unless both
companies feel that its enough to just coast on the perceived
must-have quality of the handset.

DGI

Previously on alt.cellular.attws, David G. Imber said:

> I have to ask myself, without any long knowledge or insight
> into the subject why, if both Apple and AT&T called the sale of the
> original iPhone a "success", and Apple spent the past year working on
> improving their product to some extent, they wouldn't DEMAND that AT&T
> do its job and take the year to prepare for the launch of the next
> phase iPhone, which was bound to increase the user base. Unless both
> companies feel that its enough to just coast on the perceived
> must-have quality of the handset.

From what I saw myself and read elsewhere, all of the problems with the
launch of the iPhone2 last Friday were caused by Apple, not AT&T.

It was Apple that hyped the release.
It was Apple that understocked the stores.
It was iTunes that caused activation problems by being slow and/or
crashing.

Due to the marketing agreement, AT&T had to abide by Apple's rules for
the release. The local store manager went so far as to tell me that
"Apple [effectively] owns the store for the duration" (until the line
went away).

Since then, all of the service complaints for using features like push
email/MobileMe, downloading/installing the new software on older
phones, etc, are also all Apple and have nothing to do with AT&T.

--
Jeffrey Kaplan www.gordol.org
The from userid is killfiled Send personal mail to gordol

"My children," he stood gazing out past the refinery into the depths
of space, a seer taken by a vision, "we're going to hit them in the
payroll." (Miles Vorkosigan [Lois McMaster Bujold, "The Warriors
Apprentice"])

On Tue, 15 Jul 2008 17:14:14 -0400, David G. Imber
<[email protected]> wrote:

>On Tue, 15 Jul 2008 15:52:21 -0500, Ron <[email protected]>
>wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 15 Jul 2008 13:56:26 -0400, David G. Imber
>><[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> http://www.slate.com/id/2195289/
>>>
>>
>>Absolutely zero specifics on where he had what problems with the
>>network.
>
> You're right. And I've heard similar complaints about Sprint
>that made the service sound awful, but I've been with them for nine
>years and don't have a single, not one, complaint about the coverage.
>(there are complaints, but not those)
>

One son left Sprint cause coverage was spotty in and near parts of
Culver City, CA and was non existant indoors where he lived. He liked
not having to step otdoors to make a phone call when he switched to
Cingular.

Another son left Sprint years ago when Sprint didnt have any Blue
Tooth phones.

I left because of spotty coverage and dropped calls in Houston, TX.

i.e. poor coverage at Hillcroft & Bellaire, or near Lamar High School,
or along SW Freeway and Buffalo Speedway. And of course their
overheating biodegradable 1900 MHz phones.

A friend in Austin, TX is, despite a big business discount is
considering leaving Sprint because they can't get his free roaming
correct in his family billing, and he's tiring of long calls monthly
to get a correct bill.

I'd go on, but dont know anyone else with Sprint. All my other friends
are already with Cingular/ATT, are with Verizon, or recently came to
AT&T to get an iPhone.

On Tue, 15 Jul 2008 17:46:03 -0400, Jeffrey Kaplan <[email protected]>
wrote:

>Previously on alt.cellular.attws, David G. Imber said:
>
>> I have to ask myself, without any long knowledge or insight
>> into the subject why, if both Apple and AT&T called the sale of the
>> original iPhone a "success", and Apple spent the past year working on
>> improving their product to some extent, they wouldn't DEMAND that AT&T
>> do its job and take the year to prepare for the launch of the next
>> phase iPhone, which was bound to increase the user base. Unless both
>> companies feel that its enough to just coast on the perceived
>> must-have quality of the handset.
>
>From what I saw myself and read elsewhere, all of the problems with the
>launch of the iPhone2 last Friday were caused by Apple, not AT&T.

Understand that I'm not talking about the activation mess. I
can understand that as an isolated situation. I'm talking about what
would concern me in the long run, and even if I got another phone on
AT&T's network, which is general connectivity.


>Since then, all of the service complaints for using features like push
>email/MobileMe, downloading/installing the new software on older
>phones, etc, are also all Apple and have nothing to do with AT&T.

Thanks for your reply, but again, I'm talking about making
calls, IOW, about getting and holding a signal in the air. Everything
else comes after that.

DGI

On Tue, 15 Jul 2008 18:47:38 -0400, David G. Imber
<[email protected]> wrote:


>
> Thanks for your reply, but again, I'm talking about making
>calls, IOW, about getting and holding a signal in the air. Everything
>else comes after that.
>


Anybody can make that claim, but it has no value of validity without
specifics.

On Tue, 15 Jul 2008 17:09:09 -0500, Ron <[email protected]>
wrote:


>>>On Tue, 15 Jul 2008 13:56:26 -0400, David G. Imber

>> You're right. And I've heard similar complaints about Sprint
>>that made the service sound awful, but I've been with them for nine
>>years and don't have a single, not one, complaint about the coverage.
>>(there are complaints, but not those)

>One son left Sprint cause

[SNIP]


>Another son

[SNIP]

>
>I left because

[SNIP]



>
>A friend in Austin, TX is, despite a big business discount is
>considering leaving Sprint because

[SNIP]
>
>I'd go on, but dont know anyone else with Sprint.

Thanks for your reply, but as you can read above, I explained
in a single sentence at the beginning of my note:

* I have heard complaints about coverage but I (that would be me) have
not had problems with it, ever, anywhere I've traveled.

* I also have complaints about other aspects of Sprint's operation
(eg: customer service), but not with connectivity.

So I'm afraid your note did not respond to the issue I raised.

DGI

David G. Imber <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:

> Apple spent the past year working on
> improving their product to some extent, they wouldn't DEMAND that AT&T
> do its job and take the year to prepare for the launch of the next
> phase iPhone, which was bound to increase the user base.

Y'all boys are SO funny.....

Look at the Sun....pretend that is the size of ATT.

Look at the moon....that would be Apple.

Can the moon move the sun to do anything differently?

Is any movement the moon does to the sun perceptable without some very fine
instruments?

I doubt it. Iphone isn't ATT's main business....it's a SIDELINE and a most
insignificant sideline at that shipping only 60 phones to our main store
from Friday until tomorrow. Hell, any ATT store sold more accounts during
lunch last Wednesday than the combined total of all the iphones it ever
connected to itself.

iPhone is NOT the center of the ATT Universe!.....and it never will be as
long as the fools at Apple are holding back product like this. Boy there
were some pissed off people trying to buy iPhones while I was there Monday
afternoon....

Jeffrey Kaplan <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:

> Where I am now does not currently have 3G access, but according to
> AT&T, it will by the end of this November.
>
>

http://www.wireless.att.com/coverage...rleston_SC.pdf

Pitiful.....horribly pitiful.
70% of the population of our city lives in EDGE COUNTRY, here.

Why are they buying 3G FruitFones and paying 33% more for it??

On Tue, 15 Jul 2008 23:26:25 +0000, Larry <[email protected]> wrote:

>David G. Imber <[email protected]> wrote in
>news:[email protected]:
>
>> Apple spent the past year working on
>> improving their product to some extent, they wouldn't DEMAND that AT&T
>> do its job and take the year to prepare for the launch of the next
>> phase iPhone, which was bound to increase the user base.
>
>Y'all boys are SO funny.....
>
>Look at the Sun....pretend that is the size of ATT.
>
>Look at the moon....that would be Apple.
>
>Can the moon move the sun to do anything differently?
>
>Is any movement the moon does to the sun perceptable without some very fine
>instruments?
>
>I doubt it. Iphone isn't ATT's main business..

I see where you're going, but are you saying that the iPhone,
which was what the article was about, is just particularly bad at
finding and holding a signal?

I was going on the assumption that the problems that the
writer had with connectivity were system problems, not problems with
the handset.

DGI

David G. Imber <[email protected]> amazed us all with the following in
news:[email protected]:

> On Tue, 15 Jul 2008 23:26:25 +0000, Larry <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>David G. Imber <[email protected]> wrote in
>>news:[email protected]:
>>
>>> Apple spent the past year working on
>>> improving their product to some extent, they wouldn't DEMAND that
>>> AT&T do its job and take the year to prepare for the launch of the
>>> next phase iPhone, which was bound to increase the user base.
>>
>>Y'all boys are SO funny.....
>>
>>Look at the Sun....pretend that is the size of ATT.
>>
>>Look at the moon....that would be Apple.
>>
>>Can the moon move the sun to do anything differently?
>>
>>Is any movement the moon does to the sun perceptable without some very
>>fine instruments?
>>
>>I doubt it. Iphone isn't ATT's main business..
>
> I see where you're going, but are you saying that the iPhone,
> which was what the article was about, is just particularly bad at
> finding and holding a signal?
>
> I was going on the assumption that the problems that the
> writer had with connectivity were system problems, not problems with
> the handset.
>
> DGI
>
>
>

You'll probably find it to be a little bit of both. For all of the noise
the Apple fanbois make about the iPhone, the telephone portion of the
device is conveniently left out. It is a so-so phone on a so-so network.

On 2008-07-15, David G Imber <[email protected]> wrote:
> I'm not necessarily taking sides - I've never had an iPhone
> and never been on AT&T. I know only one, maybe two people using their
> network and not well enough to get a status report on whether things
> have improved. But in the past I've heard lots of complaints. This
> writer, like I am, is in NYC (where you'd think the company would try
> to establish a solid presence).

The writer doesn't live in NYC, he lives in Washington, DC (where the
store where he first attempted to buy an iPhone was). AT&T's
service is famously wretched in DC for reasons I don't understand;
if you want decent coverage there you buy service from Verizon. AT&T's
coverage in New York, on the other hand, isn't too bad.

Dennis Ferguson

On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 01:44:40 GMT, Dennis Ferguson
<[email protected]> wrote:


>The writer doesn't live in NYC, he lives in Washington, DC (where the
>store where he first attempted to buy an iPhone was). AT&T's
>service is famously wretched in DC for reasons I don't understand;

You are absolutely right and I stand corrected. I should have
realized he's likely in DC, as that's where Slate's offices are.

What threw me is that he starts talking about network quality
on the second page, where he also informs us he's come to NYC to
purchase the phone.

That shoots my argument about major metropolitan areas about
1/2 to hell, because despite the fact that it's the nation's capital,
it's not a congested metropolis in the manner of NYC. It still causes
me concern, however. I write for a living, and while I do most of my
work in New York, I travel to different cities around the country
frequently. I have found Sprint's service to be extremely reliable,
and as it can be critical to my work, I'm reluctant to leave the devil
I know. I can imagine landing in DC (or Denver, or Ft. Worth, etc.)
and being in real trouble if I can't use my phone. Sprint always has
me breathing a sigh of relief in that dept.

FYI, I am considering the iPhone solely because I need to
communicate in Japanese, and must carry a sub-notebook and look for
wifi to do that now.

Sorry for the confusion. DGI

Previously on alt.cellular.attws, David G. Imber said:

> Understand that I'm not talking about the activation mess. I
> can understand that as an isolated situation. I'm talking about what
> would concern me in the long run, and even if I got another phone on
> AT&T's network, which is general connectivity.

I have no problems with AT&T's network. I've been with AT&T/Cingular
for about three years. The only persistent dead spots I've found are
where no one has coverage due to topography or locals not wanting
towers in their towns. I've run into one or two places where I had
poor or no coverage but Verizon users have service and those have been
fixed.

I have not yet received my iPhone, my experience so far has been with
Treos.

--
Jeffrey Kaplan www.gordol.org
The from userid is killfiled Send personal mail to gordol

Peter's Top 100 Things I'd Do If I Ever Became An Evil Overlord, #183.
Before using any device which transfers energy directly into my body,
I will install a surge suppressor.