Results 1 to 15 of 15
  1. #1
    Steven M. Scharf
    Guest
    How well your carrier respects you online

    Out of a maximum of 10:

    Nextel 9.1
    Verizon 8.8
    Sprint 8.6
    AT&T Wireless8.0
    T-Mobile 8.0
    Cingular 5.3

    http://www.ivapp.com/offer/cust_resp...TelcoS03PR.pdf

    Cingular did amazingly bad, but I think one big reason is that
    they have discontinued their e-mail customer support so they
    must have gotten a 0 in the responsiveness category. All of the
    other carriers still offer on-line support.

    Steve

    http://nyccell.com
    New York City Cellular Comparison

    http://sfbacell.com
    San Francisco Bay Area Cellular Comparison

    http://socalcell.com
    Southern California Cellular Comparison

    http://earthroam.com
    International Roaming Information







    See More: Carrier "Respect" Ratiings (How well your carrier respects you online)




  2. #2
    Giambi
    Guest

    Re: Carrier "Respect" Ratiings (How well your carrier respects you online)

    "Steven M. Scharf" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    > How well your carrier respects you online
    >
    > Out of a maximum of 10:
    >
    > Nextel 9.1
    > Verizon 8.8
    > Sprint 8.6
    > AT&T Wireless8.0
    > T-Mobile 8.0
    > Cingular 5.3
    >
    > http://www.ivapp.com/offer/cust_resp...TelcoS03PR.pdf
    >
    > Cingular did amazingly bad, but I think one big reason is that
    > they have discontinued their e-mail customer support so they
    > must have gotten a 0 in the responsiveness category. All of the
    > other carriers still offer on-line support.
    >
    > Steve
    >
    > http://nyccell.com
    > New York City Cellular Comparison
    >
    > http://sfbacell.com
    > San Francisco Bay Area Cellular Comparison
    >
    > http://socalcell.com
    > Southern California Cellular Comparison
    >
    > http://earthroam.com
    > International Roaming Information


    "Rubbish. Not True. See my previous post."

    Just kidding. But I thought I'd beat Navas to the punch.

    After all, if CingularGSM doesn't answer your email, then it wasn't meant to
    be online anyways, right?
    --
    Jason G
    2002: Yanks - $126M = 103 wins, A's - $40M = 103 wins too!





  3. #3
    Waterboy
    Guest

    Re: Carrier "Respect" Ratiings (How well your carrier respects you online)

    ...and just like Sprint.
    "Jacob Suter" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    > As of July 2002, I could check my AT&T voicemail from a landline by

    calling
    > my number and hitting #, just like Verizon.
    >
    > JS
    >
    > "Julian" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > news:[email protected]
    > > Although I've already posted a few times about how I think your sites
    > > are still very biased pro-CDMA, but I wont go into this. I wanted to
    > > point out an error.
    > >
    > > You state that only Verizon and T-Mobile support checking VM from a
    > > landline. As far as T-Mobile goes that's correct. You make a mistake
    > > stating that VM on T-Mobile can only be checked from the 1-800 number
    > > you list, when in fact it can also be reached by dialing
    > > areacode-exchange-9999 (e.g. replace the last 4 digits of your number
    > > with 9999).
    > >
    > > Julian
    > >
    > >
    > > Steven M. Scharf wrote:
    > >
    > > > How well your carrier respects you online
    > > >
    > > > Out of a maximum of 10:
    > > >
    > > > Nextel 9.1
    > > > Verizon 8.8
    > > > Sprint 8.6
    > > > AT&T Wireless8.0
    > > > T-Mobile 8.0
    > > > Cingular 5.3
    > > >
    > > > http://www.ivapp.com/offer/cust_resp...TelcoS03PR.pdf
    > > >
    > > > Cingular did amazingly bad, but I think one big reason is that
    > > > they have discontinued their e-mail customer support so they
    > > > must have gotten a 0 in the responsiveness category. All of the
    > > > other carriers still offer on-line support.
    > > >
    > > > Steve
    > > >
    > > > http://nyccell.com
    > > > New York City Cellular Comparison
    > > >
    > > > http://sfbacell.com
    > > > San Francisco Bay Area Cellular Comparison
    > > >
    > > > http://socalcell.com
    > > > Southern California Cellular Comparison
    > > >
    > > > http://earthroam.com
    > > > International Roaming Information

    > >

    >
    >






  4. #4
    Carl.
    Guest

    Re: Carrier "Respect" Ratiings (How well your carrier respects you online)

    "Julian" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    > Although I've already posted a few times about how I think your sites
    > are still very biased pro-CDMA, but I wont go into this. I wanted to
    > point out an error.
    >
    > You state that only Verizon and T-Mobile support checking VM from a
    > landline. As far as T-Mobile goes that's correct. You make a mistake
    > stating that VM on T-Mobile can only be checked from the 1-800 number
    > you list, when in fact it can also be reached by dialing
    > areacode-exchange-9999 (e.g. replace the last 4 digits of your number
    > with 9999).


    Or, like every carrier AFAIK, dial your own mobile number and hit either *
    or # when the greeting comes on.


    ---
    Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
    Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
    Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/20/2003





  5. #5
    Phillipe
    Guest

    Re: Carrier "Respect" Ratiings (How well your carrier respects you online)

    In article <[email protected]>,
    "Steven M. Scharf" <[email protected]> wrote:

    > How well your carrier respects you online
    >
    > Out of a maximum of 10:
    >
    > Nextel 9.1
    > Verizon 8.8
    > Sprint 8.6
    > AT&T Wireless8.0
    > T-Mobile 8.0
    > Cingular 5.3
    >
    > http://www.ivapp.com/offer/cust_resp...TelcoS03PR.pdf
    >
    > Cingular did amazingly bad, but I think one big reason is that
    > they have discontinued their e-mail customer support so they
    > must have gotten a 0 in the responsiveness category. All of the
    > other carriers still offer on-line support.


    Sprint claims to try for 24 hour email response, but responses (that
    come in the middle of the night) are closer to 72 hours than 24.



  6. #6
    Steven M. Scharf
    Guest

    Re: Carrier "Respect" Ratiings (How well your carrier respects you online)


    "Giambi" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    > "Steven M. Scharf" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > news:[email protected]
    > > How well your carrier respects you online
    > >
    > > Out of a maximum of 10:
    > >
    > > Nextel 9.1
    > > Verizon 8.8
    > > Sprint 8.6
    > > AT&T Wireless8.0
    > > T-Mobile 8.0
    > > Cingular 5.3
    > >
    > > http://www.ivapp.com/offer/cust_resp...TelcoS03PR.pdf
    > >
    > > Cingular did amazingly bad, but I think one big reason is that
    > > they have discontinued their e-mail customer support so they
    > > must have gotten a 0 in the responsiveness category. All of the
    > > other carriers still offer on-line support.
    > >
    > > Steve
    > >
    > > http://nyccell.com
    > > New York City Cellular Comparison
    > >
    > > http://sfbacell.com
    > > San Francisco Bay Area Cellular Comparison
    > >
    > > http://socalcell.com
    > > Southern California Cellular Comparison
    > >
    > > http://earthroam.com
    > > International Roaming Information

    >
    > "Rubbish. Not True. See my previous post."
    >
    > Just kidding. But I thought I'd beat Navas to the punch.
    >
    > After all, if CingularGSM doesn't answer your email, then it wasn't meant

    to
    > be online anyways, right?


    Sometimes I think about adding the "Rubbish" and "Not True"
    myself, just to save him the trouble!





  7. #7
    Steven M. Scharf
    Guest

    Re: Carrier "Respect" Ratiings (How well your carrier respects you online)


    "Julian" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    > Although I've already posted a few times about how I think your sites
    > are still very biased pro-CDMA, but I wont go into this. I wanted to
    > point out an error.
    >
    > You state that only Verizon and T-Mobile support checking VM from a
    > landline. As far as T-Mobile goes that's correct. You make a mistake
    > stating that VM on T-Mobile can only be checked from the 1-800 number
    > you list, when in fact it can also be reached by dialing
    > areacode-exchange-9999 (e.g. replace the last 4 digits of your number
    > with 9999).


    I left out the VM checking on Sprint and T-Mobile because it does
    not work in all areas. I am going to add it in with the caveat that it
    it doesn't work in all areas.





  8. #8
    Steven M. Scharf
    Guest

    Re: Carrier "Respect" Ratiings (How well your carrier respects you online)


    "Jacob Suter" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:SlY0b.932$1r1.5[email protected]
    > As of July 2002, I could check my AT&T voicemail from a landline by

    calling
    > my number and hitting #, just like Verizon.


    There are advantages in having a separate number for voice
    mail checking (which is why this capability was started in the
    first place). In some areas, Sprint and T-Mobile still have this
    capability with local numbers, T-Mobile at least has one number
    that works everywhere, but it is not toll-free.





  9. #9
    Tech Man
    Guest

    Re: Carrier "Respect" Ratiings (How well your carrier respects you online)

    [email protected] ("RDT") wrote:

    >> An interesting test would be if the carriers were required to produce
    >> multimode handsets that could work on all US technologies
    >> (CDMA/GSM/TDMA/Analog) in all US frequencies (850/1900) and the price to
    >> use each technology were identical. And then, over time, to record
    >> people's actual preferences of radio interface, voice coder, etc.


    Not a bad idea, but would the modern market looking for cute small phones
    tolerate the large beast needed to hold all those circuit boards to handle all
    those technologies?




  10. #10
    RDT
    Guest

    Re: Carrier "Respect" Ratiings (How well your carrier respects you online)

    In article <[email protected]>,
    Dan W. <[email protected]> wrote:
    >They already have a "test" like that in place. it's called "Churn" =)


    If all things were equal, that would be true. But, alas, they are
    not. Verizon sucks when the cell breathes. T-Mobile sucks in the
    country. Sprint PCS sucks.

    RDT
    --
    "The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings; the
    inherent virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of miseries."
    --- Sir Winston Churchill




  11. #11
    justin
    Guest

    Re: Carrier "Respect" Ratiings (How well your carrier respects you online)

    "Steven M. Scharf" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
    > How well your carrier respects you online
    >
    > Out of a maximum of 10:
    >
    > Nextel 9.1
    > Verizon 8.8
    > Sprint 8.6
    > AT&T Wireless8.0
    > T-Mobile 8.0
    > Cingular 5.3
    >
    > http://www.ivapp.com/offer/cust_resp...TelcoS03PR.pdf
    >
    > Cingular did amazingly bad, but I think one big reason is that
    > they have discontinued their e-mail customer support so they
    > must have gotten a 0 in the responsiveness category. All of the
    > other carriers still offer on-line support.



    My Sprint online invoice still shows my June payment as being due.



  12. #12
    justin
    Guest

    Re: Carrier "Respect" Ratiings (How well your carrier respects you online)

    Phillipe <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
    > In article <[email protected]>,
    > "Steven M. Scharf" <[email protected]> wrote:
    >
    > > How well your carrier respects you online
    > >
    > > Out of a maximum of 10:
    > >
    > > Nextel 9.1
    > > Verizon 8.8
    > > Sprint 8.6
    > > AT&T Wireless8.0
    > > T-Mobile 8.0
    > > Cingular 5.3
    > >
    > > http://www.ivapp.com/offer/cust_resp...TelcoS03PR.pdf
    > >
    > > Cingular did amazingly bad, but I think one big reason is that
    > > they have discontinued their e-mail customer support so they
    > > must have gotten a 0 in the responsiveness category. All of the
    > > other carriers still offer on-line support.

    >
    > Sprint claims to try for 24 hour email response, but responses (that
    > come in the middle of the night) are closer to 72 hours than 24.


    All of my e-mails were answered about four days later. Read my horror
    story on the Sprint PCS board. Sprint disappointed me severely.



  13. #13
    Emmit1
    Guest

    Re: Carrier "Respect" Ratiings (How well your carrier respects you online)

    Bottom posters are the scum of the users. Why not post at the top and not
    make people scan all the way to the bottom to read the latest?
    >
    > A. Top posters.
    > Q. What is the most annoying thing on Usenet?






  14. #14
    Carl.
    Guest

    Re: Carrier "Respect" Ratiings (How well your carrier respects you online)

    His snide little signature shows a lack of sense anyway. Having the answer
    come first is only illogical if everyone hasn't already read the question.

    "Emmit1" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    > Bottom posters are the scum of the users. Why not post at the top and not
    > make people scan all the way to the bottom to read the latest?
    > >
    > > A. Top posters.
    > > Q. What is the most annoying thing on Usenet?

    >
    >



    ---
    Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
    Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
    Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/20/2003





  15. #15
    gopi
    Guest

    Re: Carrier "Respect" Ratiings (How well your carrier respects you online)

    "Emmit1" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
    > Bottom posters are the scum of the users. Why not post at the top and not
    > make people scan all the way to the bottom to read the latest?
    > > A. Top posters.
    > > Q. What is the most annoying thing on Usenet?


    Scanning "all the way to the bottom" as you whine about is only a
    problem if you're dumb and don't properly trim to keep just the
    relevant bits of the post.



  • Similar Threads