If it makes you feel any better I have verizon and i got two texts hours after they were sent in Philly, and couldn't get a connection at a fireworks display in the burbs. I could literally SEE the cell tower, but nothing. Large amounts of people + limited capacity in random places = disaster.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
AT&T 4th of July fail
- Thread starter SonoViva
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
OMG srsly those were th3 dayz! ROFLCOPTER! Cause LOL middle school sux OMG.
Admittedly, it made me cringe to have to use the "fail" family of lingo, but sometimes there are no other words.
Some articles on AT&T and what they did for SXSW.
How AT&T Plans to Keep SXSW From Swamping Its Network
AT&T's network up to SXSW iPhone onslaught
RocketBoom's Exclusive on one of the AT&T COW trucks
How AT&T Plans to Keep SXSW From Swamping Its Network
AT&T's network up to SXSW iPhone onslaught
RocketBoom's Exclusive on one of the AT&T COW trucks
I'm still waiting for the web companies to stop spelling things without vowels. I think we've both got a ways to go before both those things get retired...
touche you win. I forgot how annoying THAT was. until you typed it in a sentence haha. But epic fail is still annoying lol.
lol @ defending AT&T
When I did have verizon, there wasn't one instance where I lost service/data capabilities at high volume events, sporting events included. AT&T just has a ****** network, plain and simple. Yes I own an iPhone 4 and love it.
Before people use the traditional "but iPhonez use so much more DATAAAAAA" in a recent study Verizon and Sprint both have more data traffic with AT&T coming in third. Their network blowwwwwws
When I did have verizon, there wasn't one instance where I lost service/data capabilities at high volume events, sporting events included. AT&T just has a ****** network, plain and simple. Yes I own an iPhone 4 and love it.
Before people use the traditional "but iPhonez use so much more DATAAAAAA" in a recent study Verizon and Sprint both have more data traffic with AT&T coming in third. Their network blowwwwwws
Haha indeed it is. So annoying that it's kind of become tongue-in-cheek with my friends. But I forget when typing, it sounds like I seriously meant to say it.
Here is another good article supporting the idea that AT&T could be doing more:
http://mobile.slashdot.org/story/10...stimates-ATampT-Needs-To-Spend-5B-To-Catch-Up
Basically just an analyst showing that AT&T spends less on infrastructure per customer than Verizon or Sprint.
I just wasted some time looking for some quantification of what is the largest population density cellular networks can support. I didn't find a good number and realize now how stupid it was to look. Of course AT&T could support more people, it is ridiculous to think that physics instead of money is what limits the quality of their service.
So make sure you use that "mark the sport" application every chance you get or else you aren't actually helping the problem. Better yet let your representatives know that they suck for rolling over to the telecos.
http://mobile.slashdot.org/story/10...stimates-ATampT-Needs-To-Spend-5B-To-Catch-Up
Basically just an analyst showing that AT&T spends less on infrastructure per customer than Verizon or Sprint.
I just wasted some time looking for some quantification of what is the largest population density cellular networks can support. I didn't find a good number and realize now how stupid it was to look. Of course AT&T could support more people, it is ridiculous to think that physics instead of money is what limits the quality of their service.
So make sure you use that "mark the sport" application every chance you get or else you aren't actually helping the problem. Better yet let your representatives know that they suck for rolling over to the telecos.
Didn't believe all the people that complained about AT&t service in the Bay area until I stayed in silicon valley for 2 weeks. It is terrible, now I understand why people want to use Verizon. I live in central NJ, and my iPhone service is great, no dropped calls, fast data. I get here in East bay, and not able to get reliable calls and data is slow as mud. If I lived here, i would dump the iPhone very quickly. Ironic that in the birthplace of the iPhone you can't use it. I wonder if apple and Steve jobs has their own cell towers so they don't how to worry about AT&T's bad cell coverage.
I think apple should buy a small cell provider like tmobile, and they can pretty much kill off android and verizon.
I think apple should buy a small cell provider like tmobile, and they can pretty much kill off android and verizon.
There is only a finite amount of bandwidth allow to be used by cell services. When you have 100's of phones fighting for the same frequencies in the same area using this same bandwidth it's a mathematical certainty that calls will fail. This is unrelated to AT&T other than they have so many iPhone's that eat bandwidth.
This should NEVER happen!! The i-4 and at&t should get reception under water, in space, in the bottom of a well!
I know, unrealistic expectations
Wait a minute, you're saying there were hundreds of thousands of people in one area where the towers are designed to service maybe a few thousand and there were problems?
WEIRD!!
Next you're going to tell me that there was a problem finding enough bathrooms.
WEIRD!!
Next you're going to tell me that there was a problem finding enough bathrooms.
Fine. Prove it then. I've been struggling to do this myself so if you are so confident that the reason for the poor coverage is because it isn't possible to fit enough RF capacity in that area then show me the math that proves it.
Every bit of logic I can manage suggests that it is more likely that AT&T just realizes they don't need to spend enough money to make their service better and that this has NOTHING to do with physical limitations.
I could be wrong but I think this defeatist "oh, well cell phone reception just can't be that good so I'll accept the low quality" attitude is ridiculous... and people with that attitude are part of the reason why coverage is so bad.
You're missing the point. Let me use my bathroom reference again to illustrate:
You go to a 4th of July celebration where there are hundreds of thousands of people within a few blocks, and you go to the nearest McDonald's to use the restroom. Once you're there, you realize that there is already a line of 500 people waiting! So you go to the manager to complain about their small restrooms. He tells you that their restrooms are large enough 360 days of the year, and there is never a line. But you insist that they should build a restroom 20 times the size of the one they have just so this line can move faster on this ONE DAY!
AT&T does the same thing. A single tower can only support so many users at once. They could either provide enough towers to cover the whole city based on the average number of users in every area OR they could put seven towers right next to each other in that one spot so that everyone is happy on the 4th of July. The people without service all over the rest of the city will be pissed, but who cares? At least you didn't have any problem connecting on the 4th of July, right?
Besides, did you think about relaxing and enjoying your holiday festivities instead of texting and talking on your phone?
Happend to me also when we had several thousand people watching a firework show my town puts on each year. In the field for the fairgrounds I had "searching" a few times.
This is normal and has always been the case for big crowds where they may not commonly form.
Though 2 weeks ago I went to a concert on the beach, and to my supprise, the 3G speed was fast. Thousands and thousands of mostly 12-28 year olds, many with smartphones... No 3G issue.
This is normal and has always been the case for big crowds where they may not commonly form.
Though 2 weeks ago I went to a concert on the beach, and to my supprise, the 3G speed was fast. Thousands and thousands of mostly 12-28 year olds, many with smartphones... No 3G issue.
Last two NFL games that I attended (one in Atlanta, one in Dallas), I lost service with my iPhone right around kick-off right when everyone started showing up. You would think in Areas like that, especially around Dallas' new stadium they would have extra towers to support the 100,000+ people that are there watching games, going to concerts, ETC.
Wait a minute, you're saying there were hundreds of thousands of people in one area where the towers are designed to service maybe a few thousand and there were problems?
WEIRD!!
Next you're going to tell me that there was a problem finding enough bathrooms.
I was in a penthouse overlooking the Art Museum. Got service up there and there was a wonderful bathroom. Only when I went out to have a cig and attempted to text my friend directions to the party did I have a problem. To address what you said about relaxing and enjoying the holiday, I did, thank you very much.
It's Miss OP. And yes I do. In human culture, there is such a thing as making conversation and commiserating. But considering GSM was designed for the small countries of Europe, it's great that it works as well as it does in the US with the larger area.
Very true. Then to ad another point, in the USA we are so heavily regulated. It's very difficult to obtain permits for new towers.
wirelessmacuser and vertigo I think we generally agree. I'm not saying I'm surprised that a ton of people in a low coverage area would result in bad service... I'm just saying that this is true because AT&T doesn't make it a priority to put up more towers (or bring in cell on wheels support) in that area.
The difference to me is that if it were really physically impossible to cover super dense areas with good service for all then we would have no right complaining.
The fact that it just is less profitable for AT&T to cover a large number of people at once means that unless we complain and make it a pain for them to keep providing poor service they will continue to do so. That is why I am arguing so hard against the AT&T defenders. If you own shares of ATT, then fine, defend away. Otherwise, you are only hurting yourself.
The difference to me is that if it were really physically impossible to cover super dense areas with good service for all then we would have no right complaining.
The fact that it just is less profitable for AT&T to cover a large number of people at once means that unless we complain and make it a pain for them to keep providing poor service they will continue to do so. That is why I am arguing so hard against the AT&T defenders. If you own shares of ATT, then fine, defend away. Otherwise, you are only hurting yourself.
